06-30-2017 02:26 PM - edited 06-30-2017 02:26 PM
06-30-2017 02:26 PM - edited 06-30-2017 02:26 PM
@Mark KashmanOther than what other Office 365 tools are autogenerated (i.e. planner, onenote), I am struggling to see the difference between communication sites and team sites. It seems all the new web parts from communiction sites are coming to team sites as well.
Are there features/functionality that you can do in a communication site that you can't do in a team site? I would love some examples or a support page/article that compares the 2 feature-by-feature.
07-01-2017 12:47 AM
07-01-2017 02:34 AM
As has been said already, Communication Site are readymade from the get go for sharing information. While only two designs are offered currently out of the box, this will expand over time. For me, Communication Sites are a convenient way for broadcasting information where as Team Sites are more a collaboration space. Here were some example uses of Communication Site from the AMA. There is some overlap of course.
"Team sites are focused on Collaboration and backed by Office 365 Groups. Communication sites are focused on broadcasting or communicating a message to a wide audience. In a team site, most users contribute content. In a Communication site, typically there are a small number of users and a large number of readers and the security groups are the more traditional SharePoint groups. Just like team sites and publishing sites previously, you want to chose the type of template that fits your business purpose."
@Claudia Lake - Following on from your Communication Sites Help Documentation post, which inspired me to create this by the way, this might be a good topic to cover officially. Either in the What is a SharePoint communication site? page or perhaps in a dedicated help page, just a thought anyway!
07-03-2017 06:44 AM - edited 07-03-2017 06:52 AM
Thanks for everyone's reply. Let me see if I can summarize. The only current difference between a Team site vs a Communication site is 1) how Microsoft is positioning them:
2) pre-made Communication site page templates, and 3) Office 365 doesn't automagically create other tools with Communication sites (i.e. planner, group, OneNote...etc).
BUT, I'm struggling to see the difference from a features perspective. For example, can you do everything on a team site that you can do on a communication site and vise versa? I would love to know if the feature pariety between the two are always going to be there or are they on two parallel tracks that are eventually going to diverge to create their own unique use-cases, from a features perspective. @Mark Kashman Are there going to be Communication site exclusive features in the future? Is that the vision? Because right now there are none other than the pre-made templates that can still be built using a Team site. Or said another way, if we already have a Team site whose purpose aligns with the positioning of a Communication site, will we wish we should have switched to a Communication site in the future?
07-10-2017 07:23 AM
Hi Cian, thanks for this feedback and for the backlinks to our help content! I'll be sure to incorporate this into our content to help users better decide when to use a team site vs. a communciation site.
07-10-2017 11:39 AM
I sure wish the "Create Site" panel called them Communications Sites and "Group Sites" so as to differentiate the Sites+O365 Groups as something different from "traditional SharePoint team sites" (e.g. under <tenant>/teams/).
04-22-2018 09:42 AM - edited 04-22-2018 09:44 AM
04-22-2018 09:42 AM - edited 04-22-2018 09:44 AM
Hi all, I'd like to add to the discussion from my experience.
I believe that the best way to explain the difference between a Communication Site and a Team Site is in how they are meant to be used. Team Sites have an O365 group associated with them and, therefore, can be a great resource for team collaboration (e.g., executives working on a project together who need to be able to share notes, access documents, etc). For this purpose, a Team Site will include a distro list, a team calendar, a Planner, a OneNote, etc. This Team Site can be public or private and the O365 Group associated with it will be displayed in your Outlook (under the "Groups" section of your panel) allowing members to easily access files in the site, email all other members, view the team calendar, etc. Additionally, when you create a Team Site, you can attach the site to an MS Team to take advantage of the features offered by MS Teams (persistent chat, call conferencing, connectors, etc).
Communication Sites, on the other hand, are a great way to create and promote compelling information with others (e.g., we use Communication Sites in our adoption campaigns, e.g., Office Adoption Campaign) but, because Communication Sites do not come with an O365 Group, you are more limited in what you can do with them (i.e., you cannot attach a Communcation Site to an MS Teams for instance).
Beyond these differences, you can make a Team Site look the same as a Communication Site as the webparts and navigation are the same. This makes sense as you may want to have a nice looking Team Site to share information with your team.
I hope this helps.
06-25-2018 08:15 PM
I have the same questions/concerns.
I have read that if you wish to connect your site to a Hub Site, then it is best to use a Communication Site to ensure that the site picks up the Navigation from the Hub.
This leads me to believe that there are technical differences between a Team site and a Communication site. And if this is true, are they just settings that can be changed?
I need to now if I can change my existing team sites into communication sites that can be connected to a Hub Site.
06-25-2018 10:47 PM
07-18-2018 11:01 AM - edited 07-18-2018 11:04 AM
I have Noticed:
1. I find that you can associate a classic SharePoint site to a hub site if you turn on the Site Pages feature in Site Features, then create a new Home page for the classic site using the Site Page layout.
2. By default, on a Communication site, you cannot create additional page libraries, only document libraries.
3. Team sites are really Outlook Group sites, with the same objects being generated as would be if you created the group from Outlook. Group/Team sites require you to choose Private or Public, and by default it makes the entire group the site collection administrator. Somehow, SharePoint differentiates between Owners and Members inside the group; and even thought the entire group is SCA, permissions of Owners and Members do differ somewhat. The group also shows up in the Members group of the site, as seen in Advanced Permissions. Advanced Permissions is hidden in Site Settings on Team sites, but you can still get there using the usual URL (/_layouts/15/user.aspx), or via the new Permissions UI.
12-13-2018 03:52 AM
Adding my frustration...
I find the choice between Team and Communication site to be increadibly confusing. We're just a small company who needs an intranet, plain and simple. When I created our company's site about 6-12 months ago, I used a Communication site. Why, I'm not sure. I think I needed a certain web part or something, though I'm not sure if I ended up using it.
Now I wanted to add the Planner Web Part, but for some reason that's exclusive to team sites. I guess I could move everything over (manually), but what about the Sharepoint document library I created? It doesn't seem I link to it from a team site. Was it wrong of me to use a communication site for the company's file server in the first place?
Oh pretty please give me a simple advise on what to use. Why can't we just have one single "Modern Site" template and then let users customize it to the way they like over time?
12-13-2018 02:48 PM
The omission of the Planner web part does strike me as odd, though the existing Planner web part is hyper tuned to the Groups experience. That's why it doesn't currently work with Comms sites, though I agree that (especially if the Plan is public) there should be the ability to add ANY Plan to the web part.
02-02-2019 01:40 PM
02-28-2019 12:09 AM
Agreed! I share the same frustration. As a part-time SharePoint Administrator I do not have the expertise to catch the implications of the terms and language used in the help texts and discussion forums on the topic. I also started out with a communication site because the main purpose was to broadcast information, only to find out the various limitations later. One by one.
I now think that if there is any level of user/guest contribution or permission management one should go for a team site!?!
The preconfigured design-template aspect of the team vs. communication site's initial setup is secondary to me. What I need is an overview of hard limitations in terms of web parts, permission management, user/guest grouping, navigation etc. Who would guess that it is not possible to implement a left side navigation bar in a communication site?
What are the things you can NOT do when you start out with a team site? Any?
02-28-2019 09:03 AM - edited 02-28-2019 09:41 AM
I wrote this up as I was doing my testing. Biggest for me was communication sites don't allow guests.
And not having Planner.
What are the technical differences between a communication site and a team site?
06-17-2019 09:21 PM
06-26-2019 07:30 AM
@Peter Vincent #2 is not entirely correct. Yes if you remove the quick launch the page will stretch to the left but the main content area of a modern page in a team site is limited in width and will not fully stretch to the right like a page in a communications site would.
@Peter Vincent wrote:
2) While the quicklaunch is present in a modern SharePoint teams site, the page content will stretch to be full width like a Comm's site if the quicklaunch is emptied.
05-26-2020 08:51 PM