How can we make Microsoft Teams better?

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.)

368 votes
Sign in
(thinking…)
Sign in with: Facebook Google
Signed in as (Sign out)

We’ll send you updates on this idea

Morten Jonsen shared this idea  ·   ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
declined  ·  Warren responded  · 

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.
-Warren

92 comments

Sign in
(thinking…)
Sign in with: Facebook Google
Signed in as (Sign out)
Submitting...
An error occurred while saving the comment
  • Anonymous commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    I use one team for only me, so I can plan my work and the different projects I work with. I work with a lot of different people on different projects so I want them to be able to access my information about their projects, ergo adding them to a single chanel within my team.

    I dont want them to be able to access everything else I have going on in my teams! ONLY the specific chanel that is specific to their project.

  • Mech commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    I agree with Curtis:
    It's neither of the two options you are suggesting. This is it's own and very valid request.

    I think what people are really requesting is that just because a user is part of a team doesn't mean they should be part of every single channel in the team. There will be lots of discussions about sub sections of a project that not everyone should be included on. Also allowing user permissions per channel would help with allowing team members to drive their portion of the project more efficiently without being given permission to drive the entire team. And like other users have said adding external members to single channel in a team would be incredibly useful.

    It appears you guys have built Teams with the very definition of the word "Team" in mind, which means you must be aware that an efficient team has roles defined, and that not every role needs to know what the other role is doing in order to complete its assignment. Just because my warehouse is part of the end delivery of a project doesn't mean they need to be part of the sales strategy discussion, and if they add input or try to keep track of that portion of the project it could hinder the desired outcome. I don't want them pulling information they may have heard in another channel as a task they need to concern themselves with. I will work with them on their role in a project, while I work with sales on their role in the project. Sales and warehouse are part of the same team but shouldn't be discussing their needs with each other necessarily, they should be communicating with the Project Manager.

    The way teams is designed now, in order for me to segregate lines of communication, I need to talk to warehouse about my project in their warehouse team, and sales about my project in the sales team. Now all the discussions and data points for my project are scattered among a bunch of teams and difficult to consolidate instead of being all on the project team where they belong.

    Also it doesn't make any sense: I have several channels, but for some reason they are neither automatically assigned to new members nor can I manage the channels each member have access to

  • Matej Kastner commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    Hallo @skprufo, in bigger IT department I need to work with various "groups" within same team and channels. For example I want to notify all @devops (6 guys) within message about deployment. Since message is important for whole IT deparment, I want to send it in general team/channel. Since there is no "groups" support within TEAMS (as implemented in Slack) assigning people to some channel (means "making channel favorite for them by admin") would solve this issue - because after assignment I can easily mention @devops and I will be sure, that all 6 guys will be mentioned, but other people not.

  • Anonymous commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    Actually, Assigning the members to channel means that Lets suppose we have created a new team called "Team XYZ" and assigned certain members to it i.e. member1, member2, member 3.
    Now, after that team is created, we have created a channel under that team called "Channel XYZ". By default, all the team members would be able to access this channel XYZ but what if we need to add another member to the Channel XYZ (lets say that member is member 4) that member should have access to the notifications of Channel XYZ but not other channels under Team XYZ.

    I hope I have explained it well.

  • Gordon Dyet commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    I agree with the idea, it would be great to be able to manage users for each channels, the same way you can teams.

    For example if I have the General Team setup with the whole General team included I should be able to setup a channel with just a subset of that team.

  • Maurine Curtin commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    I really need the ability to have channels that are viewable by a subset of the team as well. With a large team, not every member is on every project. I would also like to be able to have sub-channels for grouping like projects together but that is a different discussion.

  • Stanley Gordon commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    In practice, each channel should be able specify members, along with the rights for each tab (view, edit, destroy), etc.

    Right now I am forced to create separate teams to manage permissions when in fact users should be part of one team focusing on different aspects of a project.

  • Milo commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    If I understand correctly, then this functionality would allow me to add members to a channel who are not part of the "parent" team. YES, I need to do that. My department has projects that overlap with other departments. It would be great to create channels that essentially function as ad hoc teams for a purpose, without adding non-department members to a department team.

  • Curtis commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    It's neither of the two options you are suggesting. This is it's own and very valid request.

    I think what people are really requesting is that just because a user is part of a team doesn't mean they should be part of every single channel in the team. There will be lots of discussions about sub sections of a project that not everyone should be included on. Also allowing user permissions per channel would help with allowing team members to drive their portion of the project more efficiently without being given permission to drive the entire team. And like other users have said adding external members to single channel in a team would be incredibly useful.

    It appears you guys have built Teams with the very definition of the word "Team" in mind, which means you must be aware that an efficient team has roles defined, and that not every role needs to know what the other role is doing in order to complete its assignment. Just because my warehouse is part of the end delivery of a project doesn't mean they need to be part of the sales strategy discussion, and if they add input or try to keep track of that portion of the project it could hinder the desired outcome. I don't want them pulling information they may have heard in another channel as a task they need to concern themselves with. I will work with them on their role in a project, while I work with sales on their role in the project. Sales and warehouse are part of the same team but shouldn't be discussing their needs with each other necessarily, they should be communicating with the Project Manager.

    The way teams is designed now, in order for me to segregate lines of communication, I need to talk to warehouse about my project in their warehouse team, and sales about my project in the sales team. Now all the discussions and data points for my project are scattered among a bunch of teams and difficult to consolidate instead of being all on the project team where they belong.

  • Zach commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    We are also really needing this feature. We need to have members of a Team (such as IT Services) but then be able to change membership of channels.

  • Arpit Kumar commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    This is very important feature that we need:
    Assigning different number of members with different roles in a channel. This will vary among various channels.

  • Dan Pittman commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    Assigning unique members to channels would eliminate the needless proliferation of Office 365 Group Teams in favor of Team channels. For example a Team could represent an organizational unit that is comprised of multiple projects for which it is accountable. Each project would be a channel in the Team. Project channels would no doubt include a sub-set of members from the organizational unit Team but might also include external persons who are not members of the organizational unit Team but who have a unique role on a Team project.

  • Homero Leal commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    Contextual channels (assigned/selected members, actively involved, public) may avoid creating multiple chat groups (and each member creates its own with same people some times...)

  • Homero Leal commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    Believe private/public teams is different then private/public channels and different then contextual channels (private or public).

    Having the same dilemma at the moment also...
    Creating so many "Teams" just to have contextual conversations and meetings. Team of 25 working on same product/cliente that work in sub-teams (e.g. 5 scrum teams), should I create 1 MS team or 5 MS teams. If I could use 5 channels (public), 1 for each sub-team and then have common/other channels (public also) for full 25 members and also 1 channel for 4 members in a private confidential conversation....would this be better/easier to manage/maintain/use for everyone?

  • Anonymous commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    To add to the conversation or reiterate certain points:

    Our organization would like to create separate Channels within a group with dedicated personnel assigned to it. These assigned people would be able to receive communication directed specifically to the channel while avoiding communication sent to other (non-General) channels. For example:

    Group: Business Development (100 users)
    Channel: Outreach (25 users)
    Channel: Research (25 users)
    Channel: General (100 users)
    Channel: Product Owners (50 users)

    We would need Group owners to be able to report who is in each channel and control/view who is following specific channels as well as hide channels that users do not belong to when necessary.

  • Mariel Haddad commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    My case = IT team
    Each channel is a different project
    Each project different people within the same team participate on
    I want to be able to select those people for each project.

    Also another cool capability would be the capability of hiding channels that you don't need to be involved with

  • Etienne Bailly commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    Hello , one exemple :

    Financial Team = 10 members
    - Channel General = 10 members
    - Channel VIP Finance = 3 members (chosen from the 10 members)

    We should be able to specify some users from
    To my mind we should be able to put for exemple 10 members in a Team and on a specific Channel to reduce audience : to chose some users from this 10 members

  • c b commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    Hi.. was just going to look for a topic like this. It's kind of a bug actually.. I invite members to the Team.. OK.. (even though it's public.. why do users not see it until invited?? weird) but then within a channel, if you send a message @channelName it just sends it to EVERYONE in the team. That's not cool. It should only send to people who are in the channel. And so obviously people need to be able to control their notifications of each channel. by default, (TAKE SLACK AS EXAMPLE PLEASE!) the user should not be notified of anything unless it's for them, or for a channel they are following or something. I'd error on the side of FEWER notifications than too many. Right now we have a problem because EVERYONE gets notified if anyone uses an @channel mention.

  • Daniel Albert commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    Hello, we would like to offer the following service: we are working as a group of insurance agents. In our company every agent has an own eMail adress with a Premium Business Licence. For our teams I would like to offer some kind of support concerning different departments. When our agents have a problem they should be able to contact the different departments as a team, so that every agent can access the messages. At the moment we're trying to work with eMails, which isn't contemporary anymore. When I put all of them into one channel, the chat record can't be separated between the different agents. How can we solve this problem? Is it possible to form teams? The departments have access to one mailbox, but these mailboxes can't be connected to one team. This setting is mentioned in the recommendations but I can't use it. How can we use our mailboxes in teams?

  • Jake commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    Our use case for this is that we have channels that would be important to only specific members of the overall team. A team can consist of everyone involved in a project/area but we want channels for the smaller subsets. For example: A channel just for the developers. Not everyone needs to see their back-and-forth and that channel would be an area just for them.

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.