Hub Site News and secured team/group sites

[Jeff Harlow]

Love the idea using a Hub Site and then associating all of our team/group sites we have so that news can be aggregated. However running into a problem.  Most of the team/group sites are locked down to that group (HR, Managers, IT, etc.)  If the site is locked down, the news will not be visible to all users.  Is there a way to control this? Right now, in order for users to see the news posted on each of these sites, end users have to had at minimal read access which means they also have access to the site and document libraries.   Only other option posts to having a communication site (open) and a team sites (closed) and having folks add their articles to their respectful communication site; but that seems like additional resources that should not be needed.  Am I missing something? 

[#2 · Accepted solution]

That's exactly how I setup sites for my previous Organizaiton. They have a Communication site which they know and maintain as their "Org facing" site. This is where they put news, and documents they want the org to have, and anything else open to the organization related to their site. Such as HR comm site would have policies for the org for benefits etc. IT Would have training docs / vids / news etc. And so on.

That IMO is pretty par for the course. And their "Team Site" is connected to Teams etc. So that's their working area private to their Team, where I let them know they can still have sharing exceptions to documents etc. if they still need to share but the docs should stay private to the rest of the org. It went over well.

[#3]

Thanks for your reply. I was actually cleaning my office and found a ShareGate adoption guide from Ignite and on page 40 it basically stated the same. There should be a Published Site (Communication Site) and a Collaboration Site (Team/Group Site).  Guess in the end it makes sense for security but seems odd that you have to actually have two different sites to make this happen.  Just want to make sure before I start rolling this out that I am in deed going by Best practice.  Thanks again for your response.