How can we make Microsoft Teams better?

Custom Team Member Roles

Currently for any given team, there are only two options: member or owner.

This only allows for two tiers of permissions. It would be great if there was the ability to either add custom roles to add more granularity for adding/removing permissions for different tiers of teammates.

291 votes
Sign in
Sign in with: Facebook Google
Signed in as (Sign out)

We’ll send you updates on this idea

Austin Brown shared this idea  ·   ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →


Sign in
Sign in with: Facebook Google
Signed in as (Sign out)
  • Matthew Bourgeois commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    Keep it simple (don't make me think). Customization create ambiguity.

    For those in a cross functional team, how about simply being able to add Title or Alias to your name which will define responsibility.

  • Anonymous commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    Issue: o365 custom roles has 4 Teams roles that can be assigned to a user. We have a third party vendor that does 1.5/2.0 tier support. There is no role that has trouble shooting permissions and Teams creation. Since, a non Teams admin can only create up to 500 teams, they have already hit the limit, since teams when into production. I had to assign full Teams admin [Keys to the Teams universe]. This is a security issue for us. We opened a case with MS and currently the PG is aware, but there are no plans in the near future to add a new role.

  • Orton Tsun commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    Same request as certain other posters. Using Teams for collaboration within a functional team and would like to identify roles/titles such as Team Lead, Project Manager, etc. (which differ from the individual's actual title within the organization).

  • Simon Plummer commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    A contributor permission needs to be added as we may want a level of fixed folder hierarchy that members can add/remove files etc but not adjust the folder structure. This is available in SharePoint, but we have to manually assign this. Should be available via teams in line with the objective surely rather than just owner and edit?

  • Peter Kelder commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    Was just looking hoe to add roles ;-) Possibility to add roles would be very welcomed. looking for a solution to replace BPMS tools with combination of Teams, Flow and planner and am serously missing ability to manage roles.

  • Todd Roberts commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    I agree this is needed, but to be clear, I would like to see only more roles with the same available permissions (although breaking out ability to delete the team or modify owners as suggested by Anonymous is a good idea). I do not believe permissions should be added to individual channels, as I think some commenters may be interpreting the suggestion.

  • Steve Ironside commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    This would be grand - ideally this should also be something that could be done as part of a site design, so you could have a verb "createSPGroup"; then update "addPrincipalToSPGroup" to allow users to be added to the newly created role.

  • Anonymous commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    Agreed! This is exactly what is missing in teams. In clearer form, there should be one more option called "Creator". The Creator will be assigned to the one that created the team and only that user can delete the team and delete owners or members (Full permissions). Owners can only invite members or delete members and channels but cannot delete other owners or teams. This can allow us to create department-wide teams where we can have control on all the companies departments and users.

  • Roman Buchwald commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    No no no, please dont do allow this granularity. The flat right concept is a big advantage. Team contents must be transparent from scratch. Keep it simple.

  • Reidar commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    I would like to have parents to see what I as a teacher have given the students in class notebook and assignments without having them being included in those who are going to get feedback on the assignment.

  • Tim Perry commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    A lot of good comments here. One that is important to us is simply a viewer kind of role. Not a member, but able to see what's going on. This allows creators/members to do work, and others to benefit without abusing the member listing.

  • Anonymous commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    Agreed. We used the recommended champion rollout and have a champion or two for each team who is in charge of "moderating" a team and the channels that are created.

    We'd like to create a role so that our "champions" (rollout method recommended by MS) can moderate these channels and create and delete the channels in their vision and direction rather than having someone create disorganization from spinning up too many channels or deleting valid channels.

  • Stephen commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    This feature would make teams much more useful to us, as we'd be able to have a huge company-wide team (1,800 users) for certain events, with more levels of access. General users are view-only, and maybe don't even have access to some tabs at all. Some users are contributors who can contribute to conversations. Some users are managers who can create conversations and add tabs. Still higher managers could remove or edit tabs, or change individual user permissions (up to their own level). Lastly, owners can manage the team fully

  • Anonymous commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    Along the same lines as the last poster I would like to see the ability to add additional custom columns to the members list. This isn't for the purpose of the actual "idea" here targeting permissions (likely need a new idea), but is more for a project team role, categorization/grouping/attributes such as partner, steering committee, working committee, etc. etc, per below.

    On a related note, being able to show relationships that would support the creation of a project org chart fed by this data would be awesome.

  • commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    This would be very helpful actually. As a minimum, I'd like to be able to define someone as a "Partner"/"Stakeholder" *on the Outlook group level* to be able to send emails to that tier whenever we have a larger announcment as opposed to "Admins"/"Working members". This also would make it easier for people to identify who in a group is a regular and who just depends on the group, etc.

  • Tomas Westerhus commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    In our organization most Teams are public and users can choose to join a Team. This is a great way for the organization to keep informed on topics and projects of interest. The primary issue with this approach is that a given Team will have member not participating in the actual collaboration. I would like to see a new member role for read access only. It should also be optional if this role is included in the @team .... mention group.

← Previous 1

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.