Given that hub sites/ Teams/Groups etc is forcing users to have thousands of site collections instead of a site hierarchy, what recommendation do you have to simplify the design of Information Architecture for any large scale SharePoint deployment. Do users create thousands of copies of the same content type and site columns on all Site Collections, or is there a better way?
The core of our modern IA for SharePoint Online is the combination of hub sites and site designs (https://aka.ms/spsitedesigns). Hub sites provide the shared navigation and roll up of related sites, and site designs give you the flexibility to apply customizations as sites are created, including (through integration with the patterns and practices toolkit) content management. We will continue to look at ways to streamline sharing content types across an organization.
and while we hope Office365 Groups and self-service site creation are a net value add for your organization, and that hub sites help IT organize those user-created sites, you can use admin controls to disable self-service for some or all users if your particular needs require a more centralized/managed process.
I've been researching whether to design an organisation's document management IA by using either the traditional (site collections, sub-sites for a business function) or hub site approach. I can see you're recommending hub sites here, but how does using modern Team sites (aka. Groups) work for those high risk, high value documents that need more control over the document life-cycle and business processes e.g. having various roles/levels of security based on a processes, types of documents, disposition, classification etc.
Are we saying hub sites are more for collaboration and "intranet" scenarios?
Further, this article specifically contradicts this advice: