Appreciate this video Mr. DeShon, it solidified my ideas for my organization, and made sure my direction wasn't crazy, lol. Glad to have you back too by the way! I also want to mention my old company was purchased by a much larger company so instead of supporting ~500 users, we're talking between 1500 to 2000 now. All the ideas I was going to implement for our Sharepoint and Power Platform services will greatly assist with this integration so I would like to thank you for all the videos you've created and ideas you've given. Here's to hoping for that big raise after all this work I'm about to put in!
So glad you made this video. In some recent experiences I have seen orgs shifting away from public vs. private facing sites. I think it even makes sense to leverage different URLs for each site i.e. /home and /team IF.....enough pre-planning has been performed.
l do one for internally open data (everyone read) and one for controlled information (Only editing members). We use a flat structure with multiple hubs that control read access and brand data controlled or not. I have been back and forth about draft storage... tag files with metadata denoting reuse or standardize library names. I have advocates for back office and front office libraries only...Ahh! I am a flat file fan. People won't add metadata when in nested folders. Presently l remove the default Documents library from sharepoint menu (hidden bit) and asked users to create custom libraries chunked by file types (forms, images, projects, etc) as needed. l an considering removing read all access on just the default Documents library since that is the library used by Teams for primarily draft content, but l don't know what that would break with forms etc... Worth noting: Users add teams to their sharepoint site later because they want group forms and need to chat about planner, etc. When they do that l add a Teams link, so they can pop into Teams from sharepoint. The user have asked to stop wrangling endless 365 groups. A goal was to not have folders created in Documents via sharepoint becuase they aren't visible in the files tabs. I learned the hard way about accidental channel deletion via sharepoint file cleanup.
I love the details in this video and definitely has helped me understand those concepts a lot cleaner. I had a question looking at it from the inner department standpoint. Using a scenario such as an Dept: IT Team in a M365 Group, reviewing your video, it mentions it best for collaboration within the department. Looking at it when you get to a larger size and inner departments within IT (IT Support, System Administration, Development, etc.) would you be looking at the security at that level to stay within the Dept: IT Teams and building a Private channel for the inner departments (which in turn creates a separate site) with permissions still managed at the Teams Level or break out into another M365 Teams Group? I could see both ways being tailored to the permissions still staying within their respective M365 Group and easily manageable at the Teams Level with a New Owner and Members for the private channel/site. It's somewhat the question of looking at security best practices as you mentioned in another video, but I have heard sites built within others is not the best approach.
great question...for large organziations, i would create a new team per department (regardless of their structure dept within the parent department)...this is so subjective, and it depends on how large is the team. just keep in mind the management of the "team members" at the team level can create a lot of friction and slow down productivity if the structure is too deep....which is why I like to keep the MS Team structure flat (team per department) which possible...so larger orgs, will tend to have a team per department even it that department is 4th or 5th level deep in the org
another thing to keep in mind...private channels do not use MS 365 groups...but rather just the SP groups (which cannot be used outside of the SP site collection...so it falls apart when you need a planner or calendar or any other asset that's secured by m365 groups.
Thanks, DeShon. Great tutorial that addresses a current need that we have: a strategy for dept-facing collaboration v. company-facing info/self-support/support. And how to do that.
Great content! What would be the difference if the org-facing intranet was a communications site instead of a teams site, plus individual Teams for intra-dept content?
Hi there! Thank you for your comment! If the org-facing intranet was a communications site instead of a Teams site, the main difference would be in the way information is organized and accessed. Communications sites are designed to be more structured and focused on delivering news, announcements, and other content to a broad audience within the organization. They typically include features like news articles, events, and promotional items. On the other hand, Teams sites are more collaborative and interactive, with a focus on teamwork and communication within a specific department or project. They include features like chat, channels for specific topics, document collaboration, and integration with other Microsoft 365 apps. By using individual Teams for intradepartmental content, you can create dedicated spaces for each team within the department to collaborate, share files, and communicate. This allows for more targeted and specific communication within the department, while the org-facing intranet can still serve as a central hub for broader information dissemination. Overall, the choice between using a communications site or individual Teams sites will depend on the specific needs and preferences of your organization and department. It's important to consider factors such as the desired level of collaboration, the type of content being shared, and the audience you are targeting. I hope this helps clarify the difference! Let me know if you have any further questions.
very good question...and all three are different (despite the word 'calendar' in each). Group Calendar is similar to an Outlook Distribution List....where it is similar to a shared mailbox with a calendar. | list with calendar view is really just a list of data with a calendar layout...no integration with Outlook calendars and so far, does not support some of the common calendar requirements like color coding, re-occurring events, or integration with Outlook, SharePoint events calendar is the classic SharePoint calendar, but have a nice modern UI for SharePoint pages....BUT the calendar view is still classic and does not integrate well with modern Page....it has all of the core calendar requirements (re-occurring events, integrates with outlook as a "cloud calendar", support color coding (I think it maxes out at 7 or 9)...the only draw back is it's classic look, it is not responsive and does not integrate well with all of the new modern tools (MS Teams, Modern SharePoint, etc...)
Thanks again. What are your thoughts about using a SharePoint site as a communication source for Guests in Microsoft Teams? Guests will view the SharePoint content using the custom Viva Connection app on their mobile phones. Or, can the SharePoint site source be through audience targetting then through Viva Connection? The goal is to use SharePoint as my intranet source that is available to guests outside my organization. After configuring Viva Connection or audience targetting, Guest access will be customized to be very restrictive. In essence, I want my community to download Microsoft Teams, get notified about community meetings via viva connection, and be able to participate in community meetings via voice and video when they get a meeting invite in the Teams app. Members will now have our community organization app on their phones when they register as guests. Looking forward to your reply. Thanks, DeShon!
Hi there! Thank you for your question. Using a SharePoint site as a communication source for guests in Microsoft Teams is definitely a feasible option. You can configure the SharePoint site and use Viva Connection to provide access to guests outside of your organization. By using audience targeting and customizing guest access restrictions, you can control what content and features guests can access. This allows you to create a personalized experience for guests while still maintaining security. Guests can download Microsoft Teams, receive notifications about community meetings through Viva Connection, and participate in voice and video meetings when they receive an invitation in the Teams app. It's a great way to engage with your community! Please keep in mind that these features may have specific requirements and configurations, so I would recommend consulting Microsoft documentation or reaching out to their support for specific implementation guidance. Thanks! - DeShon
Thanks, DeShon. Great tutorial that addresses a current need that we have: a strategy for dept-facing collaboration v. company-facing info/self-support/support. And how to do that.
Appreciate this video Mr. DeShon, it solidified my ideas for my organization, and made sure my direction wasn't crazy, lol. Glad to have you back too by the way! I also want to mention my old company was purchased by a much larger company so instead of supporting ~500 users, we're talking between 1500 to 2000 now. All the ideas I was going to implement for our Sharepoint and Power Platform services will greatly assist with this integration so I would like to thank you for all the videos you've created and ideas you've given. Here's to hoping for that big raise after all this work I'm about to put in!
wishing you the best....sounds like you have a solid strategy!
So glad you made this video. In some recent experiences I have seen orgs shifting away from public vs. private facing sites. I think it even makes sense to leverage different URLs for each site i.e. /home and /team IF.....enough pre-planning has been performed.
i agree! thanks for watching
l do one for internally open data (everyone read) and one for controlled information (Only editing members). We use a flat structure with multiple hubs that control read access and brand data controlled or not.
I have been back and forth about draft storage... tag files with metadata denoting reuse or standardize library names.
I have advocates for back office and front office libraries only...Ahh! I am a flat file fan. People won't add metadata when in nested folders.
Presently l remove the default Documents library from sharepoint menu (hidden bit) and asked users to create custom libraries chunked by file types (forms, images, projects, etc) as needed. l an considering removing read all access on just the default Documents library since that is the library used by Teams for primarily draft content, but l don't know what that would break with forms etc...
Worth noting: Users add teams to their sharepoint site later because they want group forms and need to chat about planner, etc. When they do that l add a Teams link, so they can pop into Teams from sharepoint. The user have asked to stop wrangling endless 365 groups.
A goal was to not have folders created in Documents via sharepoint becuase they aren't visible in the files tabs. I learned the hard way about accidental channel deletion via sharepoint file cleanup.
you make some very interesting points. Folder vs. Library...let me think on this one a bit
I love the details in this video and definitely has helped me understand those concepts a lot cleaner. I had a question looking at it from the inner department standpoint. Using a scenario such as an Dept: IT Team in a M365 Group, reviewing your video, it mentions it best for collaboration within the department. Looking at it when you get to a larger size and inner departments within IT (IT Support, System Administration, Development, etc.) would you be looking at the security at that level to stay within the Dept: IT Teams and building a Private channel for the inner departments (which in turn creates a separate site) with permissions still managed at the Teams Level or break out into another M365 Teams Group?
I could see both ways being tailored to the permissions still staying within their respective M365 Group and easily manageable at the Teams Level with a New Owner and Members for the private channel/site. It's somewhat the question of looking at security best practices as you mentioned in another video, but I have heard sites built within others is not the best approach.
great question...for large organziations, i would create a new team per department (regardless of their structure dept within the parent department)...this is so subjective, and it depends on how large is the team. just keep in mind the management of the "team members" at the team level can create a lot of friction and slow down productivity if the structure is too deep....which is why I like to keep the MS Team structure flat (team per department) which possible...so larger orgs, will tend to have a team per department even it that department is 4th or 5th level deep in the org
another thing to keep in mind...private channels do not use MS 365 groups...but rather just the SP groups (which cannot be used outside of the SP site collection...so it falls apart when you need a planner or calendar or any other asset that's secured by m365 groups.
Thank you. This is exactly what I was looking for!
Glad it was helpful!
Thanks, DeShon. Great tutorial that addresses a current need that we have: a strategy for dept-facing collaboration v. company-facing info/self-support/support. And how to do that.
thanks Jim...thank you again for watching
Thank you , You Explain it so clearly
I appreciate you 🙏
Great work, ty
Thank you! I'm glad you found the video helpful. If you have any questions or need further clarification, feel free to ask.
Great content! What would be the difference if the org-facing intranet was a communications site instead of a teams site, plus individual Teams for intra-dept content?
Hi there! Thank you for your comment! If the org-facing intranet was a communications site instead of a Teams site, the main difference would be in the way information is organized and accessed. Communications sites are designed to be more structured and focused on delivering news, announcements, and other content to a broad audience within the organization. They typically include features like news articles, events, and promotional items.
On the other hand, Teams sites are more collaborative and interactive, with a focus on teamwork and communication within a specific department or project. They include features like chat, channels for specific topics, document collaboration, and integration with other Microsoft 365 apps.
By using individual Teams for intradepartmental content, you can create dedicated spaces for each team within the department to collaborate, share files, and communicate. This allows for more targeted and specific communication within the department, while the org-facing intranet can still serve as a central hub for broader information dissemination.
Overall, the choice between using a communications site or individual Teams sites will depend on the specific needs and preferences of your organization and department. It's important to consider factors such as the desired level of collaboration, the type of content being shared, and the audience you are targeting.
I hope this helps clarify the difference! Let me know if you have any further questions.
Thanks again for the good content
My pleasure!
What is the difference between group calendar, list with calendar view and share point events calendar?
very good question...and all three are different (despite the word 'calendar' in each). Group Calendar is similar to an Outlook Distribution List....where it is similar to a shared mailbox with a calendar. | list with calendar view is really just a list of data with a calendar layout...no integration with Outlook calendars and so far, does not support some of the common calendar requirements like color coding, re-occurring events, or integration with Outlook, SharePoint events calendar is the classic SharePoint calendar, but have a nice modern UI for SharePoint pages....BUT the calendar view is still classic and does not integrate well with modern Page....it has all of the core calendar requirements (re-occurring events, integrates with outlook as a "cloud calendar", support color coding (I think it maxes out at 7 or 9)...the only draw back is it's classic look, it is not responsive and does not integrate well with all of the new modern tools (MS Teams, Modern SharePoint, etc...)
Thanks again. What are your thoughts about using a SharePoint site as a communication source for Guests in Microsoft Teams? Guests will view the SharePoint content using the custom Viva Connection app on their mobile phones. Or, can the SharePoint site source be through audience targetting then through Viva Connection? The goal is to use SharePoint as my intranet source that is available to guests outside my organization. After configuring Viva Connection or audience targetting, Guest access will be customized to be very restrictive. In essence, I want my community to download Microsoft Teams, get notified about community meetings via viva connection, and be able to participate in community meetings via voice and video when they get a meeting invite in the Teams app. Members will now have our community organization app on their phones when they register as guests. Looking forward to your reply. Thanks, DeShon!
Hi there! Thank you for your question. Using a SharePoint site as a communication source for guests in Microsoft Teams is definitely a feasible option. You can configure the SharePoint site and use Viva Connection to provide access to guests outside of your organization. By using audience targeting and customizing guest access restrictions, you can control what content and features guests can access. This allows you to create a personalized experience for guests while still maintaining security. Guests can download Microsoft Teams, receive notifications about community meetings through Viva Connection, and participate in voice and video meetings when they receive an invitation in the Teams app. It's a great way to engage with your community! Please keep in mind that these features may have specific requirements and configurations, so I would recommend consulting Microsoft documentation or reaching out to their support for specific implementation guidance. Thanks! - DeShon
Thanks, DeShon. Great tutorial that addresses a current need that we have: a strategy for dept-facing collaboration v. company-facing info/self-support/support. And how to do that.
awesome!