SOLVED

How to Limit access to Channels in a Single Team

%3CLINGO-SUB%20id%3D%22lingo-sub-320505%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3ERe%3A%20How%20to%20Limit%20access%20to%20Channels%20in%20a%20Single%20Team%3C%2FLINGO-SUB%3E%3CLINGO-BODY%20id%3D%22lingo-body-320505%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3EI%20always%20tell%20people%20to%20look%20at%20it%20like%20Slack%2C%20except%20call%20Teams%20Channels.%20Then%20you%20basically%20have%20Private%20channels%20with%20sub%20channels.%20I%20mean%2C%20in%20reality%20when%20you%20look%20at%20it%2C%20it's%20the%20same%20thing.%20However%2C%20there%20are%20plenty%20of%20use%20cases%20for%20private%20channels%20for%20sure.%20%3CBR%20%2F%3E%3CBR%20%2F%3EBut%20I%20agree%2C%20group%20chat's%20work%20just%20fine%2C%20the%20biggest%20miss%20there%20is%20persistent%20file%20storage%2C%20and%20full%20group%20chat%20roster%20control.%20Once%20you%20can%20remove%20people%20from%20group%20chats%2C%20it'll%20be%20solid....%20then%20maybe%20let%20you%20pin%20a%20group%20chat%20to%20a%20team%20as%20a%20channel%2C%20then%20only%20people%20in%20the%20group%20chat%20have%20it%20render....%20next%20best%20thing%20to%20private%20channels%20right%20there%20%3Ap%3C%2Fimg%3E%3CBR%20%2F%3E%3C%2FLINGO-BODY%3E%3CLINGO-SUB%20id%3D%22lingo-sub-320419%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3ERe%3A%20How%20to%20Limit%20access%20to%20Channels%20in%20a%20Single%20Team%3C%2FLINGO-SUB%3E%3CLINGO-BODY%20id%3D%22lingo-body-320419%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3EIt%E2%80%99s%20a%20feature%20that%20for%20sure%20would%20help%20out%20and%20be%20useful%20in%20many%20cases%2C%20but%20I%20still%20think%20it%E2%80%99s%20overrated!%3CBR%20%2F%3EIf%20you%20do%20take%20some%20time%20and%20do%20proper%20planning%2C%20you%20will%20do%20fine%20most%20times%20without%20having%20%E2%80%9Cprivate%20channels%E2%80%9D%3CBR%20%2F%3ETeams%20is%20meant%20to%20be%20%E2%80%9Cif%20you%E2%80%99re%20in%20-%26gt%3B%20your%20in%E2%80%9D%20experience%20and%20having%20a%20lot%20of%20channels%20with%20different%20permissions%20will%20create%20an%20administrative%20overhead%20even%20within%20the%20teams!%20There%20is%20a%20risk%20that%20it%20will%20be%20like%20the%20days%20of%20folder%20structures%20with%20many%20different%20permissions%20on%20a%20file%20server%3C%2FLINGO-BODY%3E%3CLINGO-SUB%20id%3D%22lingo-sub-320411%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3ERe%3A%20How%20to%20Limit%20access%20to%20Channels%20in%20a%20Single%20Team%3C%2FLINGO-SUB%3E%3CLINGO-BODY%20id%3D%22lingo-body-320411%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3ESure%20-%20but%20it%E2%80%99ll%20be%20the%20No.1%20solution%20for%20Teams%20sprawl%20and%20resolve%20a%20major%20governance%20issue!%20%3Awhite_heavy_check_mark%3A%3C%2FLINGO-BODY%3E%3CLINGO-SUB%20id%3D%22lingo-sub-320405%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3ERe%3A%20How%20to%20Limit%20access%20to%20Channels%20in%20a%20Single%20Team%3C%2FLINGO-SUB%3E%3CLINGO-BODY%20id%3D%22lingo-body-320405%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3E%3CP%3EWe%20create%20Teams%20per%20client%20with%20channels%20per%20project%2C%20that%20way%20if%20we%20join%20a%20project%20we%20can%20see%20what's%20happened%20before%20at%20that%20client.%20It%20works%20really%20well.%3C%2FP%3E%0A%3CP%3E%26nbsp%3B%3C%2FP%3E%0A%3CP%3EI%20wouldn't%20wait%20for%20a%20new%20feature%20that's%20not%20been%20announced%20or%20has%20any%20timescale%20set%2C%20while%20it's%20a%20common%20ask%20it's%20not%20always%20really%20the%20best%20solution.%26nbsp%3B%3C%2FP%3E%3C%2FLINGO-BODY%3E%3CLINGO-SUB%20id%3D%22lingo-sub-320381%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3ERe%3A%20How%20to%20Limit%20access%20to%20Channels%20in%20a%20Single%20Team%3C%2FLINGO-SUB%3E%3CLINGO-BODY%20id%3D%22lingo-body-320381%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3EThanks%20Adam%3C%2FLINGO-BODY%3E%3CLINGO-SUB%20id%3D%22lingo-sub-320380%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3ERe%3A%20How%20to%20Limit%20access%20to%20Channels%20in%20a%20Single%20Team%3C%2FLINGO-SUB%3E%3CLINGO-BODY%20id%3D%22lingo-body-320380%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3EGood%20Deal.%3CBR%20%2F%3EThanks%20Chris!%3C%2FLINGO-BODY%3E%3CLINGO-SUB%20id%3D%22lingo-sub-320362%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3ERe%3A%20How%20to%20Limit%20access%20to%20Channels%20in%20a%20Single%20Team%3C%2FLINGO-SUB%3E%3CLINGO-BODY%20id%3D%22lingo-body-320362%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3EPrivate%20channels%20-%20being%20worked%20on%3CBR%20%2F%3E%3CBR%20%2F%3E%3CA%20href%3D%22https%3A%2F%2Fmicrosoftteams.uservoice.com%2Fforums%2F555103-public%2Fsuggestions%2F16911079-support-for-private-channels%22%20target%3D%22_blank%22%20rel%3D%22noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%22%3Ehttps%3A%2F%2Fmicrosoftteams.uservoice.com%2Fforums%2F555103-public%2Fsuggestions%2F16911079-support-for-private-channels%3C%2FA%3E%3CBR%20%2F%3E%3CBR%20%2F%3ENumber%201%20ask%20in%20Teams%20currently.%3CBR%20%2F%3E%3CBR%20%2F%3EBest%2C%20Chris%3C%2FLINGO-BODY%3E%3CLINGO-SUB%20id%3D%22lingo-sub-320349%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3ERe%3A%20How%20to%20Limit%20access%20to%20Channels%20in%20a%20Single%20Team%3C%2FLINGO-SUB%3E%3CLINGO-BODY%20id%3D%22lingo-body-320349%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3ENo%2C%20you%20can%E2%80%99t%20currently!%20MS%20is%20working%20on%20a%20solution%20for%20this%20but%20we%20don%E2%80%99t%20know%20when!%3CBR%20%2F%3EEither%20use%20a%20different%20team%20or%20use%20a%20group%20chat%20with%20the%20files%20shared%20in%20that%20files%20folder%20(%20onedrive%20)%3C%2FLINGO-BODY%3E%3CLINGO-SUB%20id%3D%22lingo-sub-636566%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3ERe%3A%20How%20to%20Limit%20access%20to%20Channels%20in%20a%20Single%20Team%3C%2FLINGO-SUB%3E%3CLINGO-BODY%20id%3D%22lingo-body-636566%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3E%3CP%3E%3CA%20href%3D%22https%3A%2F%2Ftechcommunity.microsoft.com%2Ft5%2Fuser%2Fviewprofilepage%2Fuser-id%2F72542%22%20target%3D%22_blank%22%3E%40adam%20deltinger%3C%2FA%3E%26nbsp%3BI%20don't%20think%20it's%20actually%20overated%20Adam.%20Take%20for%20a%20example%2C%20I%20have%20so%20many%20clients%20in%20my%20company%20and%20scartered%20around%20the%20globe.%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3E%26nbsp%3B%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3ECompany%20A%20has%20many%20offices%2Fsites%20in%20different%20parts%20of%20the%20country%20and%20similarly%20in%20different%20countries.%20I%20have%20many%20of%20these%20sites%20who%20do%20not%20want%20share%20projects%20they're%20working%20on%20until%20it's%20completed.%20Others%20are%20happy%20to%20share%20which%20is%20fine.%20Without%20the%20option%20to%20restrict%20users%20to%20channels%2C%20one%20is%20left%20with%20creating%20multiple%20teams%20for%20all%20the%20various%20sites%20within%20a%20single%20company.%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3E%26nbsp%3B%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3ESo%20in%20my%20thoughts%2C%201%20Teams%20is%20better%2C%20have%20multiple%20channels%20for%20the%20different%20sites%20then%20make%20them%20public%20or%20private%20to%20limit%20audience.%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3E%26nbsp%3B%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3EIn%20my%20case%20I%20can%20potentially%20have%201%20Team%20(1%20Organisation)%20with%208%20channels%20(8%20sites)%20but%20currently%20at%20it%20stands%2C%20I%20have%20to%20create%208%20separate%20teams%20for%20a%20single%20organization.%20No%20amount%20of%20proper%20planning%20will%20help%20in%20this%20case%20-%20the%20problem%20is%20it%20soon%20becomes%20a%20clutter.%3C%2FP%3E%3C%2FLINGO-BODY%3E%3CLINGO-SUB%20id%3D%22lingo-sub-636575%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3ERe%3A%20How%20to%20Limit%20access%20to%20Channels%20in%20a%20Single%20Team%3C%2FLINGO-SUB%3E%3CLINGO-BODY%20id%3D%22lingo-body-636575%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3EHi!%20Thank%20you%20for%20the%20feedback!%20My%20take%20on%20overrated%20don%E2%80%99t%20mean%20that%20it%20can%E2%80%99t%20be%20used%20in%20a%20good%20way%20%3A)%3C%2Fimg%3E%20Wether%20you%20use%20teams%20or%20channels%20it%20might%20be%20cluttered%20both%20regarding%20to%20structure%20and%20permission%20wise!%3CBR%20%2F%3EBut%20overall%20I%E2%80%99m%20not%20against%20private%20channels%20and%20do%20believe%20that%20with%20proper%20use%20of%20it%2C%20it%20definitely%20has%20its%20pros!!%3CBR%20%2F%3E%3CBR%20%2F%3EAdam%3C%2FLINGO-BODY%3E%3CLINGO-SUB%20id%3D%22lingo-sub-636580%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3ERe%3A%20How%20to%20Limit%20access%20to%20Channels%20in%20a%20Single%20Team%3C%2FLINGO-SUB%3E%3CLINGO-BODY%20id%3D%22lingo-body-636580%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3E%3CP%3EI%20concur%20on%20that%20basis%20%3CA%20href%3D%22https%3A%2F%2Ftechcommunity.microsoft.com%2Ft5%2Fuser%2Fviewprofilepage%2Fuser-id%2F72542%22%20target%3D%22_blank%22%3E%40adam%20deltinger%3C%2FA%3E%2C%20something%20gotta%20give%20somewhere.%20I've%20seen%20some%20really%20poorly%20implemented%20active%20directory%2C%20and%20other%20tree-node%20structure%20so%20-%20so%20I%20share%20the%20concerns%20where%20proper%20planning%20doesn't%20happen.%3C%2FP%3E%3C%2FLINGO-BODY%3E%3CLINGO-SUB%20id%3D%22lingo-sub-636791%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3ERe%3A%20How%20to%20Limit%20access%20to%20Channels%20in%20a%20Single%20Team%3C%2FLINGO-SUB%3E%3CLINGO-BODY%20id%3D%22lingo-body-636791%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3EYour%20better%20off%20with%20multiple%20teams%20anyway.%20People%20want%20to%20cram%20everything%20in%20one%20channel.%20The%20point%20of%20channels%20is%20spreading%20conversations%20into%20different%20topics%20etc.%20by%20putting%20things%20into%20a%20channel%20you%20got%20an%20%E2%80%9Cinbox%E2%80%9D%20folder%20that%E2%80%99s%20unmanaged%20basically.%20%3CBR%20%2F%3E%3CBR%20%2F%3EBy%20having%20teams%20for%20each%20then%20each%20one%20can%20utilize%20having%20multiple%20channels%20to%20split%20up%20those%20conversations%2C%20work%20streams%20and%20notifications.%20%3CBR%20%2F%3E%3CBR%20%2F%3EI%20dunno%20some%20cases%20private%20channels%20make%20sense%20but%20in%20instances%20where%20you%20are%20trying%20to%20load%20projects%20by%20channel%20or%20customers%20by%20channels%20using%20teams%20makes%20more%20sense%20IMO.%3C%2FLINGO-BODY%3E%3CLINGO-SUB%20id%3D%22lingo-sub-742033%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3ERe%3A%20How%20to%20Limit%20access%20to%20Channels%20in%20a%20Single%20Team%3C%2FLINGO-SUB%3E%3CLINGO-BODY%20id%3D%22lingo-body-742033%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3EDear%20Chris%2C%3CBR%20%2F%3ESo%20MS%20Teams's%20teams%20are%20not%20Project%20based%2C%20it%20is%20team%20based%2C%20isn't%20it%3F%3CBR%20%2F%3E%3CBR%20%2F%3EFor%20example%2C%3CBR%20%2F%3EI%20have%20a%20project%20called%20Workplace%20transformation%20including%20Building%20Team%2C%20Network%20Team%2C%20Users%20Team.%3CBR%20%2F%3EI%20would%20create%203%20teams%20for%20this%20project%20at%20least%20because%20I%20do%20not%20want%20to%20let%20them%20see%20the%20details%20across%20the%20teams.%3CBR%20%2F%3Eand%20then%20I%20have%20to%20create%20another%20team%20for%20announce%20the%20project%20progress%20and%20overall%20plan.%3CBR%20%2F%3E%3CBR%20%2F%3EAnd%20meanwhile%20there%20are%20another%20project%20upcoming%20with%20multiple%20teams%20again%2C%20the%20teams%20list%20will%20be%20so%20long.%3CBR%20%2F%3E%3CBR%20%2F%3EBut%20the%20Private%20channel%20solves%20my%20problem.%3C%2FLINGO-BODY%3E%3CLINGO-SUB%20id%3D%22lingo-sub-775636%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3ERe%3A%20How%20to%20Limit%20access%20to%20Channels%20in%20a%20Single%20Team%3C%2FLINGO-SUB%3E%3CLINGO-BODY%20id%3D%22lingo-body-775636%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3E%3CP%3E%3CA%20href%3D%22https%3A%2F%2Ftechcommunity.microsoft.com%2Ft5%2Fuser%2Fviewprofilepage%2Fuser-id%2F72542%22%20target%3D%22_blank%22%3E%40adam%20deltinger%3C%2FA%3E%26nbsp%3B%20I%20wrote%20an%20article%20last%20year%20about%20how%20you%20can%20make%20private%20folders%20within%20a%20Team.%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3E%3CA%20title%3D%22restricting%20permissions%22%20href%3D%22https%3A%2F%2Fwww.linkedin.com%2Fpulse%2Fmicrosoft-teams-restricting-channel-permissions-levar-chan-williams%22%20target%3D%22_self%22%20rel%3D%22nofollow%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%22%3Ehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.linkedin.com%2Fpulse%2Fmicrosoft-teams-restricting-channel-permissions-levar-chan-williams%3C%2FA%3E%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3E%26nbsp%3B%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3EI%20recently%20figured%20out%20how%20to%20do%20the%20opposite%3A%20invite%20Guests%20to%20individual%20folders%2Fchannels%20without%20giving%20them%20access%20to%20anything%20else%20in%20the%20Team.%20They%20won't%20have%20access%20to%20the%20conversations%20either.%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3E%3CA%20title%3D%22Granular%20control%22%20href%3D%22https%3A%2F%2Fwww.linkedin.com%2Fpulse%2Fmore-granular-control-microsoft-teams-folders-guests-chan-williams%22%20target%3D%22_self%22%20rel%3D%22nofollow%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%22%3Ehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.linkedin.com%2Fpulse%2Fmore-granular-control-microsoft-teams-folders-guests-chan-williams%3C%2FA%3E%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3E%26nbsp%3B%3C%2FP%3E%3C%2FLINGO-BODY%3E%3CLINGO-SUB%20id%3D%22lingo-sub-964027%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3ERe%3A%20How%20to%20Limit%20access%20to%20Channels%20in%20a%20Single%20Team%3C%2FLINGO-SUB%3E%3CLINGO-BODY%20id%3D%22lingo-body-964027%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3EGood%20it%E2%80%99s%20coming%20real%20soon%20then%3C%2FLINGO-BODY%3E%3CLINGO-SUB%20id%3D%22lingo-sub-964132%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3ERe%3A%20How%20to%20Limit%20access%20to%20Channels%20in%20a%20Single%20Team%3C%2FLINGO-SUB%3E%3CLINGO-BODY%20id%3D%22lingo-body-964132%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3ECool--any%20idea%20when%2C%20roughly%3F%3C%2FLINGO-BODY%3E%3CLINGO-SUB%20id%3D%22lingo-sub-320342%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3EHow%20to%20Limit%20access%20to%20Channels%20in%20a%20Single%20Team%3C%2FLINGO-SUB%3E%3CLINGO-BODY%20id%3D%22lingo-body-320342%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3E%3CP%3EHello%20everyone%20and%20thanks%20in%20advance%20for%20the%20help!%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3E%26nbsp%3B%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3EIs%20there%20a%20way%20to%20share%20only%20one%20channel%20under%20a%20particular%20team%20and%20not%20all%20at%20once%20with%20the%20link%3F%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3EWe%20have%20a%20%22Projects%20Awarded%22%20and%20%22Projects%20Bid%22%20teams%20with%20many%20jobs%2Fprojects%20under%20each%20team.%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3E%26nbsp%3B%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3EI%20want%20to%20share%20just%20one%20of%20those%20individual%20channels%20or%20jobs%20to%20a%20particular%20person%20without%20them%20seeing%20all%20of%20the%20other%20projects.%20Is%20there%20a%20way%20to%20do%20that%3F%20I%20do%20I%20need%20to%20make%20a%20separate%20Team%20for%20every%20project%3F%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3E%26nbsp%3B%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3EThank%20you%2C%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3EMike%3C%2FP%3E%3C%2FLINGO-BODY%3E%3CLINGO-LABS%20id%3D%22lingo-labs-320342%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3E%3CLINGO-LABEL%3EActivity%3C%2FLINGO-LABEL%3E%3CLINGO-LABEL%3ECommunity%3C%2FLINGO-LABEL%3E%3CLINGO-LABEL%3EConversations%3C%2FLINGO-LABEL%3E%3CLINGO-LABEL%3EDeveloper%3C%2FLINGO-LABEL%3E%3CLINGO-LABEL%3EMicrosoft%20Teams%3C%2FLINGO-LABEL%3E%3CLINGO-LABEL%3ESettings%3C%2FLINGO-LABEL%3E%3CLINGO-LABEL%3ETips%20%26amp%3B%20Tricks%3C%2FLINGO-LABEL%3E%3C%2FLINGO-LABS%3E%3CLINGO-SUB%20id%3D%22lingo-sub-964377%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3ERe%3A%20How%20to%20Limit%20access%20to%20Channels%20in%20a%20Single%20Team%3C%2FLINGO-SUB%3E%3CLINGO-BODY%20id%3D%22lingo-body-964377%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3E%3CP%3EHopefully%20November.%26nbsp%3B%20It%20was%20due%20in%20September%20%3CA%20href%3D%22https%3A%2F%2Fwww.microsoft.com%2Fen-us%2Fmicrosoft-365%2Froadmap%3Ffeatureid%3D50588%22%20target%3D%22_self%22%20rel%3D%22noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%22%3Eand%20then%20October%202019%3C%2FA%3E%20but%20now%20that%20window%20has%20nearly%20passed%20too.%3C%2FP%3E%3C%2FLINGO-BODY%3E%3CLINGO-SUB%20id%3D%22lingo-sub-963991%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3ERe%3A%20How%20to%20Limit%20access%20to%20Channels%20in%20a%20Single%20Team%3C%2FLINGO-SUB%3E%3CLINGO-BODY%20id%3D%22lingo-body-963991%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3E%3CP%3E%3CA%20href%3D%22https%3A%2F%2Ftechcommunity.microsoft.com%2Ft5%2Fuser%2Fviewprofilepage%2Fuser-id%2F72542%22%20target%3D%22_blank%22%3E%40adam%20deltinger%3C%2FA%3E%26nbsp%3BHoly%20crap%20this%20is%20limiting.%26nbsp%3B%20We%20have%20a%20team%20that%20has%20multiple%20projects%2C%20and%20those%20projects%20will%20naturally%20have%20a%20different%20set%20of%20people%20working%20on%20it.%26nbsp%3B%20We%20also%20may%20want%20to%20have%20management%20discussions%20that%20the%20rest%20of%20the%20members%20are%20either%20not%20privvy%20to%20or%20needed%20on.%26nbsp%3B%20Having%20channels%20be%20a%20free-for-all%20(especially%20with%20the%20%22private%22%20designation%20when%20literally%20anyone%20can%20just%20waltz%20on%20in%20there)%20is%20a%20ridiculous%20stretch%20of%20reasonable%20user%20assumptions%20when%20trying%20to%20migrate%20to%20this%20tool%20from%20something%20like%20Slack.%26nbsp%3B%20Why%20can't%20we%20just%20create%20a%20channel%20and%20add%202-3%20people%20to%20it%3F%26nbsp%3B%20Why%20was%20this%20not%20assumed%20to%20be%20the%20default%20use%20case%2Fbehavior%2Fneed%20for%20a%20product%20like%20teams%3F%26nbsp%3B%3C%2FP%3E%3C%2FLINGO-BODY%3E%3CLINGO-SUB%20id%3D%22lingo-sub-1155176%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3ERe%3A%20How%20to%20Limit%20access%20to%20Channels%20in%20a%20Single%20Team%3C%2FLINGO-SUB%3E%3CLINGO-BODY%20id%3D%22lingo-body-1155176%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3E%3CP%3E%3CA%20href%3D%22https%3A%2F%2Ftechcommunity.microsoft.com%2Ft5%2Fuser%2Fviewprofilepage%2Fuser-id%2F267931%22%20target%3D%22_blank%22%3E%40Mike_Cotter%3C%2FA%3EI%20can%20currently%20do%20that%2C%20tagging%20the%20Channel%20security%20level%20as%20%22private%22.%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3EChannel%20access%20(and%20left%20pane%20display)%20is%20then%20limited%20to%20members%20that%20are%20added%20to%20the%20%22Private%20Channel%22.%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3E%26nbsp%3B%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3E%3D%26gt%3B%20Problem%20is%20that%20you%20cannot%20create%20more%20than%2030%20%22private%22%20channels%20within%20the%20200%20allowed%20per%20TEAM.%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3E%26nbsp%3B%3C%2FP%3E%3C%2FLINGO-BODY%3E%3CLINGO-SUB%20id%3D%22lingo-sub-1169648%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3ERe%3A%20How%20to%20Limit%20access%20to%20Channels%20in%20a%20Single%20Team%3C%2FLINGO-SUB%3E%3CLINGO-BODY%20id%3D%22lingo-body-1169648%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3E%3CP%3E%3CA%20href%3D%22https%3A%2F%2Ftechcommunity.microsoft.com%2Ft5%2Fuser%2Fviewprofilepage%2Fuser-id%2F267931%22%20target%3D%22_blank%22%3E%40Mike_Cotter%3C%2FA%3E%26nbsp%3B%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3EIt%20is%20now%20possible%20to%20have%20different%20members%20in%20each%20Channel.%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3EIt%20only%20applies%20when%20creating%20a%20new%20Channel%20and%20cannot%20be%20applied%20to%20existing%20Channels.%3C%2FP%3E%3C%2FLINGO-BODY%3E%3CLINGO-SUB%20id%3D%22lingo-sub-1392536%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3ERe%3A%20How%20to%20Limit%20access%20to%20Channels%20in%20a%20Single%20Team%3C%2FLINGO-SUB%3E%3CLINGO-BODY%20id%3D%22lingo-body-1392536%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3E%3CP%3E%3CA%20href%3D%22https%3A%2F%2Ftechcommunity.microsoft.com%2Ft5%2Fuser%2Fviewprofilepage%2Fuser-id%2F72542%22%20target%3D%22_blank%22%3E%40adam%20deltinger%3C%2FA%3E%26nbsp%3B%2C%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3E%26nbsp%3B%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3EIn%20a%20situation%20where%20the%20degree%20of%20complexity%20is%20manageable%2C%20you%20can%20plan%20ahead.%20However%2C%20in%20a%20fluid%2C%20still-evolving%20and%20uncertain%20one%2C%20a%20plan's%20expiry%20date%20is%20very%20short.%3CBR%20%2F%3E%3CBR%20%2F%3EThere%20is%20a%20quote%20who%20many%20attribute%20(maybe%20wrongly)%20to%20Gen%20Eisenhower%3A%20%22Planning%20is%20everything.%20The%20plan%20is%20Nothing.%22%20or%20any%20similar%20quote%20along%20the%20same%20vein.%20It's%20good%20to%20plan%20for%20fluidity%20as%20what%20had%20been%20planned%20will%20be%20obsolete%20in%20a%20very%20short%20time%20in%20our%20current%20dynamic%20realities.%3C%2FP%3E%3C%2FLINGO-BODY%3E%3CLINGO-SUB%20id%3D%22lingo-sub-1392700%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3ERe%3A%20How%20to%20Limit%20access%20to%20Channels%20in%20a%20Single%20Team%3C%2FLINGO-SUB%3E%3CLINGO-BODY%20id%3D%22lingo-body-1392700%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3EYou%20lost%20me%20at%20the%20first%20sentence....%3C%2FLINGO-BODY%3E%3CLINGO-SUB%20id%3D%22lingo-sub-1436332%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3ERe%3A%20How%20to%20Limit%20access%20to%20Channels%20in%20a%20Single%20Team%3C%2FLINGO-SUB%3E%3CLINGO-BODY%20id%3D%22lingo-body-1436332%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3E%3CP%3E%3CA%20href%3D%22https%3A%2F%2Ftechcommunity.microsoft.com%2Ft5%2Fuser%2Fviewprofilepage%2Fuser-id%2F353810%22%20target%3D%22_blank%22%3E%40CliveHornsby%3C%2FA%3E%26nbsp%3B%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3EGood%20to%20know%20that%20it%20can%20be%20done%20(different%20members%20in%20different%20channel%20is%20one%20team)%20but%20can%20you%20explain%20how%20to%20do%20that%3F%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3Ekind%20regards%2C%20Meta%3C%2FP%3E%3C%2FLINGO-BODY%3E%3CLINGO-SUB%20id%3D%22lingo-sub-1450226%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3ERe%3A%20How%20to%20Limit%20access%20to%20Channels%20in%20a%20Single%20Team%3C%2FLINGO-SUB%3E%3CLINGO-BODY%20id%3D%22lingo-body-1450226%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3E%3CP%3E%3CA%20href%3D%22https%3A%2F%2Ftechcommunity.microsoft.com%2Ft5%2Fuser%2Fviewprofilepage%2Fuser-id%2F687858%22%20target%3D%22_blank%22%3E%40metahofzicht%3C%2FA%3E%26nbsp%3B%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3E%26nbsp%3B%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3EWhen%20creating%20a%20new%20Channel%3CSPAN%20class%3D%22lia-inline-image-display-wrapper%20lia-image-align-inline%22%20image-alt%3D%22Annotation%202020-06-09%20171320.jpg%22%20style%3D%22width%3A%20999px%3B%22%3E%3CIMG%20src%3D%22https%3A%2F%2Fgxcuf89792.i.lithium.com%2Ft5%2Fimage%2Fserverpage%2Fimage-id%2F197463iE10619C88BA42806%2Fimage-size%2Flarge%3Fv%3D1.0%26amp%3Bpx%3D999%22%20title%3D%22Annotation%202020-06-09%20171320.jpg%22%20alt%3D%22Annotation%202020-06-09%20171320.jpg%22%20%2F%3E%3C%2FSPAN%3E%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3E%26nbsp%3B%3C%2FP%3E%3CDIV%20class%3D%22mceNonEditable%20lia-copypaste-placeholder%22%3E%26nbsp%3B%3C%2FDIV%3E%3CDIV%20class%3D%22mceNonEditable%20lia-copypaste-placeholder%22%3E%26nbsp%3B%3C%2FDIV%3E%3CP%3E%26nbsp%3B%3C%2FP%3E%3C%2FLINGO-BODY%3E%3CLINGO-SUB%20id%3D%22lingo-sub-1522217%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3ERe%3A%20How%20to%20Limit%20access%20to%20Channels%20in%20a%20Single%20Team%3C%2FLINGO-SUB%3E%3CLINGO-BODY%20id%3D%22lingo-body-1522217%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3E%3CP%3EIs%20there%20a%20way%20to%20have%20a%20private%20channel%20and%20also%20have%20the%20planner%20function%20available%3F%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3EThank%20you%2C%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3EVictoria%3C%2FP%3E%3C%2FLINGO-BODY%3E%3CLINGO-SUB%20id%3D%22lingo-sub-1522255%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3ERe%3A%20How%20to%20Limit%20access%20to%20Channels%20in%20a%20Single%20Team%3C%2FLINGO-SUB%3E%3CLINGO-BODY%20id%3D%22lingo-body-1522255%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3EA%20private%20plan%20no%2C%20but%20you%20can%20create%20a%20link%20to%20other%20plans%20via%20the%20website%20tab%20and%20it%20works%20well.%3C%2FLINGO-BODY%3E%3CLINGO-SUB%20id%3D%22lingo-sub-1696672%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3ERe%3A%20How%20to%20Limit%20access%20to%20Channels%20in%20a%20Single%20Team%3C%2FLINGO-SUB%3E%3CLINGO-BODY%20id%3D%22lingo-body-1696672%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3E%3CP%3E%3CA%20href%3D%22https%3A%2F%2Ftechcommunity.microsoft.com%2Ft5%2Fuser%2Fviewprofilepage%2Fuser-id%2F76432%22%20target%3D%22_blank%22%3E%40Gordon%20Carlyle%3C%2FA%3EHi%20Gordon%2C%26nbsp%3B%20is%20there%20away%20to%20invite%20external%20users%20outside%20your%20organization%20to%20a%20specific%20channel%20in%20a%20specific%20MS%20Teams%20Team%3F%26nbsp%3B%20When%20I%20try%20to%20add%20someone%20outside%20my%20organization%20the%20Add%20button%20is%20grayed%20out%3C%2FP%3E%3C%2FLINGO-BODY%3E
Highlighted
New Contributor

Hello everyone and thanks in advance for the help!

 

Is there a way to share only one channel under a particular team and not all at once with the link?

We have a "Projects Awarded" and "Projects Bid" teams with many jobs/projects under each team.

 

I want to share just one of those individual channels or jobs to a particular person without them seeing all of the other projects. Is there a way to do that? I do I need to make a separate Team for every project?

 

Thank you,

Mike

27 Replies
Highlighted
Best Response confirmed by Juan Carlos González Martín (MVP)
Solution
No, you can’t currently! MS is working on a solution for this but we don’t know when!
Either use a different team or use a group chat with the files shared in that files folder ( onedrive )
Highlighted
Highlighted
Good Deal.
Thanks Chris!
Highlighted
Highlighted

We create Teams per client with channels per project, that way if we join a project we can see what's happened before at that client. It works really well.

 

I wouldn't wait for a new feature that's not been announced or has any timescale set, while it's a common ask it's not always really the best solution. 

Highlighted
Sure - but it’ll be the No.1 solution for Teams sprawl and resolve a major governance issue! :white_heavy_check_mark:
Highlighted
It’s a feature that for sure would help out and be useful in many cases, but I still think it’s overrated!
If you do take some time and do proper planning, you will do fine most times without having “private channels”
Teams is meant to be “if you’re in -> your in” experience and having a lot of channels with different permissions will create an administrative overhead even within the teams! There is a risk that it will be like the days of folder structures with many different permissions on a file server
Highlighted
I always tell people to look at it like Slack, except call Teams Channels. Then you basically have Private channels with sub channels. I mean, in reality when you look at it, it's the same thing. However, there are plenty of use cases for private channels for sure.

But I agree, group chat's work just fine, the biggest miss there is persistent file storage, and full group chat roster control. Once you can remove people from group chats, it'll be solid.... then maybe let you pin a group chat to a team as a channel, then only people in the group chat have it render.... next best thing to private channels right there :p
Highlighted

@adam deltinger I don't think it's actually overated Adam. Take for a example, I have so many clients in my company and scartered around the globe.

 

Company A has many offices/sites in different parts of the country and similarly in different countries. I have many of these sites who do not want share projects they're working on until it's completed. Others are happy to share which is fine. Without the option to restrict users to channels, one is left with creating multiple teams for all the various sites within a single company.

 

So in my thoughts, 1 Teams is better, have multiple channels for the different sites then make them public or private to limit audience.

 

In my case I can potentially have 1 Team (1 Organisation) with 8 channels (8 sites) but currently at it stands, I have to create 8 separate teams for a single organization. No amount of proper planning will help in this case - the problem is it soon becomes a clutter.

Highlighted
Hi! Thank you for the feedback! My take on overrated don’t mean that it can’t be used in a good way :) Wether you use teams or channels it might be cluttered both regarding to structure and permission wise!
But overall I’m not against private channels and do believe that with proper use of it, it definitely has its pros!!

Adam
Highlighted

I concur on that basis @adam deltinger, something gotta give somewhere. I've seen some really poorly implemented active directory, and other tree-node structure so - so I share the concerns where proper planning doesn't happen.

Highlighted
Your better off with multiple teams anyway. People want to cram everything in one channel. The point of channels is spreading conversations into different topics etc. by putting things into a channel you got an “inbox” folder that’s unmanaged basically.

By having teams for each then each one can utilize having multiple channels to split up those conversations, work streams and notifications.

I dunno some cases private channels make sense but in instances where you are trying to load projects by channel or customers by channels using teams makes more sense IMO.
Highlighted
Dear Chris,
So MS Teams's teams are not Project based, it is team based, isn't it?

For example,
I have a project called Workplace transformation including Building Team, Network Team, Users Team.
I would create 3 teams for this project at least because I do not want to let them see the details across the teams.
and then I have to create another team for announce the project progress and overall plan.

And meanwhile there are another project upcoming with multiple teams again, the teams list will be so long.

But the Private channel solves my problem.
Highlighted

@adam deltinger  I wrote an article last year about how you can make private folders within a Team.

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/microsoft-teams-restricting-channel-permissions-levar-chan-williams

 

I recently figured out how to do the opposite: invite Guests to individual folders/channels without giving them access to anything else in the Team. They won't have access to the conversations either.

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/more-granular-control-microsoft-teams-folders-guests-chan-williams

 

Highlighted

@adam deltinger Holy crap this is limiting.  We have a team that has multiple projects, and those projects will naturally have a different set of people working on it.  We also may want to have management discussions that the rest of the members are either not privvy to or needed on.  Having channels be a free-for-all (especially with the "private" designation when literally anyone can just waltz on in there) is a ridiculous stretch of reasonable user assumptions when trying to migrate to this tool from something like Slack.  Why can't we just create a channel and add 2-3 people to it?  Why was this not assumed to be the default use case/behavior/need for a product like teams? 

Highlighted
Good it’s coming real soon then
Highlighted
Cool--any idea when, roughly?
Highlighted

Hopefully November.  It was due in September and then October 2019 but now that window has nearly passed too.

Highlighted

@Mike_CotterI can currently do that, tagging the Channel security level as "private".

Channel access (and left pane display) is then limited to members that are added to the "Private Channel".

 

=> Problem is that you cannot create more than 30 "private" channels within the 200 allowed per TEAM.