[gameofcode]

You're right, MS Teams is definitly better placed as an org-wide communication/collaboration tool, not an external one. They really need to make it easier to communicate with people in external orgs, the org switcher is my biggest complaint.

FWIW, IT can allow people in certain groups to make their own teams, it's an admin setting.

[Onawa]

Working within the US NIH, we are forced to submit a ticket for creating any new teams and the entire Teams/Office 365 ecosystem is entirely crippled for us. All new features take forever to be approved and brought online, as well as additional connectors and apps having to go through an extensive 6+ month-long vetting process before being approved.

Makes using Teams quite a hassle, but with Skype for Business being the only other approved option for internal chat, it's better than nothing.

[basch]

Those are all organizational decisions, and not out of the box defaults. Microsoft is trying very hard to persuade organizations not to make those decisions.

Completely free teams creation does come at a cost. It makes data governance much more complicated. People creating duplicate places for things they didnt know already existed. A lack of naming convention, to be able to analyze what exists. Microsoft is pushing for people to just be able to get things done, at the expense of organization.

[technion]

When they mention "connectors and apps", right now there is a very serious amount of phishing fraud going on involving one click links that ask you to authorise a malicious app. Users see a "please click yes" prompt, they never have to enter their password and they think that sounds fine.

I wish Microsoft would try a lot harder in persuading businesses to make the decision to take oauth approvals out of the user hands, because the volume is at a point where I really feel anyone following the "empower the user" discussion almost certainly has a compromised mailbox in their business.