How can we make Microsoft Teams better?

Support for Private Channels

Looking for the ability to create a channel that only channel members can see. Private channels are available in slack. There is an admin for private channels who is the creator, and they are the ones who add/remove users.

Five types of public/privacy that is being asked for by users:

- Public-Open (visible anywhere including outside the org and anyone can join)
- Public-Invitation (visible anywhere including outside the org, must be invited)
- Company-Open (only visible inside the org and anyone in the org can join; outside the org must be invited)
- Company-Invitation (only visible inside the org, must be invited)
- Secret (invisible to everyone except existing members, must be invited)

13,196 votes
Sign in
Check!
(thinking…)
Reset
or sign in with
  • facebook
  • google
    Password icon
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Angela Sze shared this idea  ·   ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    Hey Microsoft Teams users — I want you to weigh in on new features around channels and group chats. The engineering team and I have put together this survey to find out how you want to see channels improve. You can fill it out here: https://microsoft.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_esTxHdABLQxKLvn

    And I’m still waiting on approval to get you a good update about Private Channels. I can say that we ARE working on it, fervently.

    Thanks and ping me any time, for anything at all: www.twitter.com/skprufo or sparavi@microsoft.com. I’m a little behind on email but catching up, so apologies for delays there!

    Suphatra

    1151 comments

    Sign in
    Check!
    (thinking…)
    Reset
    or sign in with
    • facebook
    • google
      Password icon
      Signed in as (Sign out)
      Submitting...
      • Zach Reliford commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Oh and in response to your Try This Instead: We are setup for a singular team, rather than people being members of multiple teams, as different Analysts have different accounts they work.

      • Zach Reliford commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        We support multiple different accounts, many with "trade secrets" discussed within chat as we are diagnosing/troubleshooting issues, as well as relaying high/critical priority tickets/issues.

        I can view information for any account that is in our Team, despite not having clearance to see these items. This could be considered an issue from a customer perspective.

      • Anonymous commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Echoing that 'try this instead' is not a viable solution.

        Please enable private channels in teams... I suspect this has been put in the 'too hard basket' because of the granular permissions required for the embedded OneNote sections, document libraries etc. It'll be worth the effort.

      • Jarek commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        We have asked for Private Channels not Private Teams.
        It is big difference.
        Many of us waiting for the Private Channels and the brakes many of us to start using Team fully.

      • Anonymous commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Try this instead is not an option. Absence of private channels is a huge barrier for using Teams in our unit. Project teams would be quite unhappy that anyone in the organisation can have access to their chat at any time. Creating a team for each project is not an option either, as with short-term projects our SharePoint space will turn into complete mess quite quickly.
        Beside, all alternatives products allow private channels.

      • Sheldon Kelly commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Is it that you have shelved the plan for private channels? If so then it would be valuable to explicitly say this and not the vague "try this instead" tag. Fundamentally, though, this option would not work in our context. The option of having a global team that allows for some level of segmentation is extremely valuable and provides great utility. Your continued work on this would be appreciated.

      • Jason Mayde commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Creating a separate Team is does not really work. The idea is that you want ALL relevant content/convos rolled-up under a master Team. Think about it in the sense of an office and you have all the different business units in that office, but you need a couple restricted channels for managers.

      • Will Morgenweck commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Agreed, try this instead isn't helpful. The idea of having permissions for a channel is so that you we don't end up with a ton of smaller teams. For example, I might have a Product team and then channels within there. I would prefer to have a product leadership channel within the Product team, which was secured to only the product leaders.

      • El3Max commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Try this instead is not a option. Need Private channels within a team. Doing it a a team level leads to countless duplication for sites, folder, files, etc.

      • Dana Pennella commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        This went from "working on it" to "try this instead" I can guarentee that having private channels in teams would be better for the workflows of many companies than having public and private teams. We need PRIVATE CHANNELS, I get asked about the status of this on a daily basis and I am extremely disappointed it went from "working on it" to "try this instead". what you're suggesting is not a solution and based on the popularity and voter demand, I suggest you move back to "working on it" or else I'm going to lose a lot of people interested in using Teams.

      • Anonymous commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Thanks for public and private teams but we need a public and private CHANNEL within a team to allow for centralized collaboration but with a specific set of folks or a broad range of folks within that centralized area.

      • Tim Goalen commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        I agree with other views here that this doesnt help. Working with a team spun up for a project i would want a channel for working with the Dev team, one that worked with externals, one that worked with stakeholders and then one that everyone could access for general updates. Having 4 teams for 1 project would be a nightmare, especially considering the teams sites and other stuff that get spun up when you create a team. Total overkill to do that

      • Sarah commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        This does not solve out issue at all: the fact that we can now create 'public teams' has put into sharp focus that we need private channels within the public teams. Otherwise we will have an immense proliferation of Teams.

      • Seth Tanner commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Public and Private Teams does not solve this issue at all. Giving team owners the ability to create a restricted channel inside of an existing team, makes a lot more sense than creating a new team to serve the purpose of a specific channel. For a real world use case we have a few teams, Product, Engineering, Operations. Each team will have their own channels, but it would be great to have a "Team Leads" channel that is restricted to just the team leads for each team. Currently there are two possible work-a-rounds 1 have a persistent group chat, which misses out on many of the channel features, or create 3 more teams Product-Leads, Engineering-Leads, Operation-Leads. The current approach leads to what I refer to as "Team Sprawl". Basically extra teams are created to circumvent feature deficiencies. This feature will also be important when the external access and federation is completed. a new team should not have to be created to provide access to an external contractor, but having a specific channel within a team, where appropriate personnel can communicate with them would be ideal.

      • Philip Erb commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Echoing that other concerns that the "try this instead" is not what we're looking for.

        For instance, within our IT "team" we have a need to have one or two channels that are restricted to select users. We do not want to have to create whole separate teams just for these cases.

      • Ladislav Šesták Jr. commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        For me it's the same as for Emin Yalcindag.

        "TRY THIS INSTEAD" is not acceptable. I want to make a group with many people and then I want to make private channels in this group!

      • Emin Yalcindag commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        "TRY THIS INSTEAD" is not acceptable. I want to make a group with many people and then I want to make private channels in this group!

      • Roger Wessel commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        "Try this instead" does not solve the problem here, because: 1) We really need the possibility to invite external users to a single channel within the Team, and 2) We also need the possibility to restrict access to a single channel within the Team (so that just some of the Team members can access the channel).

      • Anonymous commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Your "Try this instead" doesn't work for what we need. We want the ability to add users outside the team to a channel that is still within the team. For example. We have a Technology Team and an Integration Team. They sometimes work together on projects. Right now the Tech team can't see anything in the Integration Team's group, and vice versa. However they're working on a new Tech Project together, and members from both groups need to collaborate in a single channel. I don't want the teams to have unfettered access to every discussion they've both had, but I do want them to work on one channel together without having to create a separate "Tech AND Integration" team.

      Feedback and Knowledge Base