Team Opt Out - (Assign members to channels, not automatically)
I might have a team called IT and channels of IT projects. So assigning members to channels would be great, since it's not the same for each project (channels).
Primary ask is to be able to set a Team to "Opt Out" and therefore not automatically join team members to every channel under that specific Team.
Users would have the ability to invite others users to channels. (Or as an Admin, add people to channels as needed.)
This request has been declined by the feature team.
Private channels may help with items such as this request once they are released. The Private channel topic is tracked at http://microsoftteams.uservoice.com/forums/555103/suggestions/16911079
Please note the handling of “Guest Accounts” is a separate ask and can be found at: https://microsoftteams.uservoice.com/forums/555103-public/suggestions/16911109-guest-access
The request about “Guest Access at the Channel” level is being tracked by this request: https://microsoftteams.uservoice.com/forums/555103-public/suggestions/31374577-guest-access-should-be-implemented-at-the-channel
Thank you all for the feedback.
Paul Youngberg commented
People only get notifications for new posts when they're following a channel. We'd like to raise visibility of content in certain channels by adding people to that channel. This isn't a request for private channels or anything else, this is simply being able to manage people's "Follow" status on channel, much like I can manage their subscription status to an O365 Group.
Mike Weiss commented
Perhaps this is helpful:
For me, I run an ERG and it would be ideal to have everyone have access to the greater ERG Team but then only specific people who are active participants in each channel can participate in those channels. This becomes an issue when say for one channel i want to reach out to just 20 people and have to tag individually instead of @channel because @channel is the number of people who are on the team (nearly 100). People could get read-only access so they can see the channels but not be tagged/engaged/notified unless they are members of it.
John W commented
@Suphatra - no, this is not the same as public/private teams. This works within a public or private team at the channel level. Each channel can have its own members.
This feature would work great with the requested feature of moving a channel to a different team or converting a channel into a new team listed elsewhere in uservoice.com.
As users get used to using teams mistakes will happen in organizing the teams and channels. For instance, I am extremely new to teams and don't want to roll it out to the entire company and end up having a mess of teams/channels being created haphazardly. What I am trying to do is create a sandbox if you will of a team covering a bunch of channels. As I create channels, I want to invite other members in to collaborate. Some channels may be created by me for only me to organize my thoughts and keep on track of my own goals. Later I may delegate that channel out to certain members and finally break it off as it's own team. This will all start my being able to assign members at a channel level.
This is connected or the same as https://microsoftteams.uservoice.com/forums/555103-public/suggestions/16911079-support-for-private-channels
The same scenarios we have in our company:
1. Project Team - one channel to work with supplier
2. Department team - one channel for several user, other for several other e.q. geographic regions
3. Team for solving confidential cases - every channel should be visible for team and every channel for one/two more persons. Every channel different persons
Making Team for every case when we need to add one person to a one conversation makes no sens (separate SharePoint site etc), but adding to a channel - yes, the same as adding it to one folder from library people are using it today.
Lots of people waiting for this.
This would also be nice to be able to segregate teams to their designated areas with in the team as well. For example, I work with the secretaries at the school district and we have monthly meetings for the elementary secretaries and a separate monthly meeting for the middle and high school secretaries. I would like to have a team for All Secretaries and then Channels for each group individually.
Henry Morland commented
Reading through my comment again, the more common requirement is to invite internal stakeholders into a channel - that is to say people who are not in the IT team but who are involved in the development of a specific new capability.
Henry Morland commented
I have an department (set up as a team) running various projects (set up as channels).
What I would dearly love to be able to do is invite individuals outside the team to join a project (channel)
For example, one of our projects is to roll out Office 365. MS Teams is a very good tool for managing the various elements of this project - notes, chat, planner, documents etc.
The obvious thing to do is to set this up as a channel. However, because we have engaged an external consultant to help us with the transition, we have to set it up as a team instead.
This requirement is very common as most of our projects involve a few individuals outside our core team: stakeholders and/or people with special skills brought in on a project basis.
For this reason I think it would be very useful to invite people outside the core team to join a channel.
Sasja Beerendonk commented
I would really like it if we could have channels within a team with different members (subset of members of team) and/or with different accesa rights (edit/read).
Sometimes within a team you would like some information to only ne available for management, or a steerco for example. And sometimes you only want some users to just be able to read and not edit information.
I echo some of the people in this thread, and came here just to say this.
I would love the ability to create a private channel within a team.
I have several teams where I want to work on projects with only certain members of the team (~3). And I want to be able to do it without cluttering others in the team (~20) while creating the safe space for the project team to bounce ideas off within the project team without fear of judgement or interference from the rest of the team.
I would love to create a channel with just my manager to discuss one-to-one topics, that I would over email and forget about if I didn't get a response. Microsoft Teams and the channels construct drives accountability and transparency, and to be able to do it in subsets of a team, without having to create a Team for each is critical.
I sincerely hope that you will add this feature in the coming release. It would really help me push the usage of Microsoft Teams within the org.
I would also love this feature!
We are an international team with different sub-teams per region. It would be very beneficial if I can create an overall team with a private channel per sub-team where only these team members are in the channel. Then within that same team we can also have more general channels where everyone is included.
Currently, we are trying out Teams and it's quite inconvenient to have separate teams for all of the sub-teams, rather than giving them their own private channel. This option will definitely improve our chances of making Teams a success within our department and ensuring full implementation!
Since we are already using the separate teams now, perhaps an option to change/move a Team (or at least it's general channel) into a channel from another Team. (Not quite sure whether something like that is already available.)
I agree that we could invite certain members of a channel. It's also reducing the need to create another Team.
You should be able, to have someone only access one channel inside of one team, instead of seeing the whole team/group
"I want to understand if this is the same ask as the ask for public/private teams"
- It's more the ask for public/private channels
In our case we are multiple teams working on the same product. We have one private team for each one, and then one public for announcements etc.
As an example, we have a channel for voting on lunch places where most of my team participates. We also, however, have one or two people from another team that also joins from time to time. They can however not be assigned to participate in our discussions as they are not part of our team.
I don't want them to be part of our team (minimize amount of information), I don't want to have a cluttery channel in the announcement team (would like to keep it as clean as possible), and I don't want to create a public "Lunch team" (that's just ugly).
As such, the best solution imo is to be able to invite other teams' members to channels. Alternatively introduce ability to create "Public Channels" for each team. That would create semi-public teams, where the team existence is known to all but the content to others is limited.
Kymberli Johnson commented
Reducing the need to create another Team, when you can create a channel and manage the members at that level would help in large organizations like ours.
This is very much the same as the nesting channels/parent child groups-
Project- All people- 6 people
Design- 2 people + PM
Build- 2 People + PM
Content- 2 People + PM
When tasking and using planner you want to be able to assign to a channel and presently everyone in the team is getting it. We have too many moving parts and notifications and tasking will be difficult to maintain
Jonathan Gardner commented
Start with a core Team with defined members, then have Channels within the team that have a subset of Team members. In addition, I would like to see the ability to add "guest" members of a Channel (who are not necessarily members of the Team). For example, the IT Team has multiple projects and workspaces for different tasks. One of those tasks might specifically involve leadership, such as a VOIP upgrade. Members of an Executive team should be able to be given temporary access to the VOIP channel within the IT team.
Steven S commented
This should really be merged with the private channels (https://microsoftteams.uservoice.com/forums/555103-public/suggestions/16911079-support-for-private-channels). Teams should be logical groupings of employees but there are certain channels that need to be a subset of the team.
Creating new teams just to control membership adds overhead that isn't really needed, especially in smaller organizations like ours.
I have read the comments from otehr and this is something we really like. It is really a powerful feature to have the ability to restrict the admin to control who views and contributes to a particular channel.
Having read trough 12 comments below. I agree on the need to assign specific persons to specific Channels. Eg TEAM Technics - channels is Sound, Projection, Ligth, Computers, etc. Each of these Channels have their own teams, but it does'nt make sense for us to create new Teams for each of these Channels.