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)

22,431 votes
Sign in
(thinking…)
Sign in with: Facebook Google
Signed in as (Sign out)

We’ll send you updates on this idea

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

We acknowledge the customer demand for Private Channels and have been hard at work on it. Private Channels is currently in preview with a select group of customers. We expect to release the feature to the public later this Fall, and will update here when we are starting to roll out to all customers. We appreciate all the feedback you have provided to us on this forum and thank you for your patience.

~Alex

1865 comments

Sign in
(thinking…)
Sign in with: Facebook Google
Signed in as (Sign out)
Submitting...
  • 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.

  • Terry commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    Why should we have to have multiple sharepoint sites, groups, etc. created for that? seems excessive to do given enacting limited visibility to a channel shouldn't really be that hard of a task to complete.

  • Terry commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    So you are forcing us to create two+ groups for the same team so that we can silo some folks to each one? seems a bit reducndant and kind of takes away from what the channels could actually do.

  • Jennie commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    This is a functionality that relates to tasking, not just for visibility of a task. This is a critical piece and this work around is not the same as what is being asked

  • Anonymous commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    I like that you added the ability to private a whole team, but I can see it getting confusing having my developers jumping back and forth from one team to another. Information will definitely be put into the wrong team. The way we typically organize in Slack is one team for everyone and anyone from the company can join who would like to see what is happening with our products. Each product has public and private channels. The public channel is used to broadcast information to our product owners and anyone interested in updates of the release. The private channel is for internal team work only (the back and forth conversations that happen while the team is working). Sometimes there are multiple public and private channels for a product if we need break them up into smaller components for the group to work in smaller circles.

  • matshe@microsoft.com commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    I would need to use this more to give very good feedback.

    Private channels may still be important. It is way too heavy to create this many private teams on the fly. :( Channels are supposed to be more light way, ways to have a conversation on the fly. Perhaps the encouragement should be towards group chat instead? Though there some might lose needed functionality that a channel has?

  • Al Linke commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    My users asking for this too. Creating additional teams for this need would just clutter things up, not a good way to go.

Feedback and Knowledge Base



You are about to visit the UserVoice site for Microsoft Teams

We have partnered with UserVoice, a 3rd party service providing public discussion forums for product-specific feedback.

By clicking "Continue to UserVoice" you agree to UserVoice's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.