Forum Discussion
Setup and Naming Conventions for Teams
Hi all, We are fairly new to Teams and I see some speed bumps that we're going to hit soon. I was hoping to see if anyone else had hit these yet. 1) Do you anticipate having to designate whe...
Hi! These are all questions that many dabbles with..
1) except from the text that displays “this team has guests” it’s a good thing to point out if there’s guests. A common prefix is INT/EXT - “team name” or something similar.
About having a private channel with internal data is a good idea if you anticipate that guests will be added later. Because conversations can’t be moved later, this way you are set to invite guests to the main team. There’s a additional overhead to make all Internal team members - channel members too though..
2) Having many teams isn’t necessarily bad! You can archive the teams making them read-only, or copy the files to an archive library then delete the Team, depending on what needs to be saved etc.. You can have 500 000 teams in tour tenant today..
3)
Having projects as channels instead of teams is about these things:
How big is the projects? Does it needs several spaces for those projects?
Permissions? Must they be separated from each other?
Permissions will be handled with private channels but as you say for now Planner does not work. You can tab a website tab with a planner url but then to be a separate plan for each private channel, these needs to be created somewhere else, hence more groups 😕
I often prefers a Team per project. Having a prefix here is a great idea
I’ve done provisioning workflows where it adds “PROJECT” in the beginning of project teams automatically.
1) except from the text that displays “this team has guests” it’s a good thing to point out if there’s guests. A common prefix is INT/EXT - “team name” or something similar.
About having a private channel with internal data is a good idea if you anticipate that guests will be added later. Because conversations can’t be moved later, this way you are set to invite guests to the main team. There’s a additional overhead to make all Internal team members - channel members too though..
2) Having many teams isn’t necessarily bad! You can archive the teams making them read-only, or copy the files to an archive library then delete the Team, depending on what needs to be saved etc.. You can have 500 000 teams in tour tenant today..
3)
Having projects as channels instead of teams is about these things:
How big is the projects? Does it needs several spaces for those projects?
Permissions? Must they be separated from each other?
Permissions will be handled with private channels but as you say for now Planner does not work. You can tab a website tab with a planner url but then to be a separate plan for each private channel, these needs to be created somewhere else, hence more groups 😕
I often prefers a Team per project. Having a prefix here is a great idea
I’ve done provisioning workflows where it adds “PROJECT” in the beginning of project teams automatically.