This is a quick post, yet it’s still an important one. We’re using more and more Office 365 Group -based SharePoint sites these days. Even when you know you aren’t going to use some of the goodies you end up with, this type of site is making more and more sense.
<addendum data-datetime=”Sun May 14 2017 10:56:53 GMT-0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)”>
Several people have asked me in other forums the basic question: “So what?” If all dates and times are stored in UTC, does it really matter what the site’s Regional Settings are? Frankly, that’s got me a little bit stumped.
It certainly feels wrong that the site’s settings don’t match its primary locus, but since team members can span the globe, what’s the impact?
I know I struggle as a developer to show everyone things in the right date/time based on their settings, and it feels like the platform doesn’t give us great tools for this. What other issues does it raise? Please add your thoughts and issues in the comments. I’m interested in things other than the usual “The people in Redmond don’t realize that we’re not all in their timezone” stuff – which is basically all I’ve pointed out here. </addendum>
BUT, there’s a simple problem that can have longer-term ramifications. The default time zone for every new Group-based site we create is PDT, also known as UTC-08:00. You have to go into Site Settings to change it manually for every site you create this way. Since a lot of my clients are in EDT, this is tedious.
I’m guessing no one in Redmond even notices this, because PDT is their time zone. I spot it every time I create a new Group-based site during a migration because Sharegate warns me the time zones of the source and destination sites are different when I start to copy content across. (Yay, Sharegate!)
If you happen to be a non-US person, then ALL of the regional settings are likely to be wrong for you. I’ve checked, and there is no way to change the default here – unless it’s a VERY recent change.
Here are some Office 365 UserVoice suggestions you can run off to vote for:
On the SharePoint home UI, when I want to create a “group”, I am told I will “Get a team site connected to Office 365 Groups”. So based on that one sentence, I might quite reasonably assume I’m creating a “Team” and a “Group” – which it so happens I am – sort of.
In the Groups UI in the Admin Center, we see these options:
Office 365 Group
Mail-enabled security group
In the Exchange admin center when we start to create a “group”, we’re given these choices:
Office 365 Group
Dynamic distribution group
But don’t fret. When you go to create a “group” in the Azure AD UI, you can create a “group” with Membership type of:
We can also check a box to “
Selecting ‘Yes’ will turn on Office 365 features for this group
I can even try to add the “group” – it’s not clear which type of “group” I’ve actually created – to the membership of another “group”. “Group Type” seems to be one of the following:
Mail enabled security
When I create a Team in Microsoft Teams, there’s not even a clue that I’m also creating an Office 365 Group behind the scenes. Maybe that doesn’t really matter to an end user, but the fact that a “Team” is also a “Group” is another terminology SNAFU.
Some people might say that as an “IT Pro”, one should always understand all of these terms intrinsically, but I doubt that it’s often the case that this is true. The terms cross different “workloads” in Office 365 and can vary in terminology from their on premises counterparts, especially across server versions. Add to that the fact that many “admins” are the lone SharePoint/Exchange/Office 365/Chief Cook/Bottle Washer in their organization, and there is little hope they will understand the nuances. Heck, I do this stuff for a living and I find it confusing. Sometimes things are hard for no good reason.
Let’s assume we have an organization which is totally sold on the value of Office 365 Groups (note the capitalization of “groups”). If they have been using SharePoint and Exchange either on premises or in Office 365, they probably already have a mix of all the different types of “groups” shown above. When someone in that organization tries to create an Office 365 Group for – say – the Executive Team, it’s highly likely they will get an error like:
Note that “group alias” is not one of the terms used above, nor does the error give even an inkling of how to solve the problem. Not even a worthless “Contact your administrator” as a fine how-do-you-do. So, what is the user likely to do?
Well, I’ll posit that they will create a Group named “Executive Group” or “Executives” or something else spelled a little differently. That Group won’t be linked to any of the previous artifacts and thus will begin the route to more chaos that we had before.
Of course, this is a real use case I’ve run into at an actual client, as is often the case with my beefs. As far as I can tell, there is no way to convert a “Mail-enabled security group” to an “Office 365 group” without some sort of Powershell tomfoolery. That’s just bad. I’ve reached out to my MVP network for help here and I’ll update this post if I’m wrong – and I’d love to be.
This is where the old Microsoft line would have been that it’s a great “partner opportunity” or that there are “$9 spent in consulting for every $1 spent on server products”. Those were always crappy answers, and they were often driven by confusing things just like this. The “avoid a mess” or “clean up the mess” roles fell to partners who were more than happy to lap up the dollars agonized organizations were willing to toss them to fix things.
The new Microsoft doesn’t want to work this way, but in many cases, their own large size and competing teams (small “t”, generic use) still lead us to these sorts of problems.
One of the things we as consultants spend a *lot* of time doing is working with organizations to build a common set of terminology. Sometimes you may hear this called taxonomy or ontology, but the bottom line point is to get everyone to agree to a set of words and phrases that they can use consistently to express the same thing. If I came out of one of those efforts with as many terms as I’ve listed above, I’d consider the effort a failure, especially if several terms meant essentially the same thing.
So, Dear Microsoft, please tighten up the terminology as quickly as you can. Next we need to know how to convert each of the old, legacy types of “groups” to an Office 365 Group – without resorting to Powershell. Ideally, we should just be able to click a button on any of the old things to make it a new thing, which would take us through a process (if we need one) to get it done.
Even better, when I try to create that Executive Team Office 365 Group, walk me – as a user – through fixing the issue. In other words, help me solve the problem BEFORE I’ve created the mess, so I don’t need to call a consultant to fix things. (Yes, nose, face, etc., but I think most of us consultants would rather be building valuable functionality than cleaning up messes. If your consultants relish this type of work – beware.)
Make it easy for us to help ourselves. Cut down on those support calls. Stop making your customers hire expensive consultants to clean up messes. Make Office 365 the best it can be.
Post 999! Sadly, I may have just used up my allotment of quote characters for any future posts.
There are changes afoot in the way we can manage permissions in an Office 365 Group Team Site. (Naming for this stuff is getting really tricky. I continue my habit of capitalizing “things” that have a name in the product, to avoid confusion with the “concepts” behind them.)
In the last few days, we’re seeing some new ways to manage Group permissions behind the cog in a “modern” Team Site, aka, the site for an Office 365 Group.
Dan Holme (@danholme) posted an image to Facebook – which I think is visible to his friends, thus basically public – that shows his view of what’s going on.
I see slightly different things in several tenants. I *think* First Release has to be on for you to have these capabilities, but I’m not positive about this. If you have the Site Permissions option behind the cog in a “modern” Team Site, like this…
…you’ll see a panel which looks something like the one below. The red box is what seems to be new. From a Group Team Site life cycle management perspective, being able to “flip” a site from Edit to Read mode is a Very Good Thing. I’m not a huge fan of the “archive” idea, but I often want to stop people from using a site after it’s usefulness has waned. At that point it can be an historical record, but people shouldn’t be able to add new content to it or change existing content.
It took me some fiddling around to figure out how this works, but by clicking on the “Edit” underneath the Group members, I can change the permissions from Edit to Read.
The effect of this is basically to slide the Group members down into the Read bucket.
What I’d really like to be able to do is add *different* people into the Read bucket – maybe we want the executives to be able to drop into a project Team Site, but not edit stuff, for example – but I can’t figure out how to do that with the UI as it is. Note that the “go to Outlook” text at the top of the panel is actually a link (sort of invisible, but it’s there) to take you over to Outlook to manage Group membership. I don’t see anything over in Outlook which reflects this Read idea, but I expect that’s coming.
One of the joys of a living and breathing service is we get to see things as they roll out, sometimes even in the middle of changes. I expect this will all gel in the near term, but at the moment, it’s pretty confusing, IMO. I’ve reached out to Dan to gather more info, and I’ll add it here as I understand things better. In the meantime, we know that more granular permissions control for Groups is really coming!
Yesterday I had a chat with Dan about where this is all heading. It was one of those “I can’t tell you what he showed me” conversations, but I can say that I see the sense in where it’s heading.
It’s a tricky line they are walking as they move SharePoint from “classic” to “modern” pages. Many of us long-time SharePoint folks are looking for the same terminology and UI that we’re used to – even though we’ve been clamoring for improvements for years!
The upshot is I think we will have the right combination of the old SharePoint (that’s probably why we see “Site Members/Owners/Visitors” in the UI above) and the “modern” SharePoint (probably more role-based?). It’s going to continue to feel weird as we move from one world to the other, but we’re getting there.
Finally, Dan and I talked about a few things I think they could communicate a bit better. I expect Dan and others will be doing posts around some of those topics (did you know you can remove the News Web Part from a “modern” Team Site home page now?) and more very soon.
This is an expanded version of the article I wrote for BZ Media‘s SPTechReport – the folks who bring you SPTechCon – last week. (Use my code ANDERSON when you register for SPTechCon Austin and save an additional $200!)
Last week I had the honor of being a judge at the Arctic SharePoint Challenge in Oslo, Norway. This is an annual challenge put on by a group of SharePoint-focused consulting companies in and around Oslo, though occasionally teams come from further afield.
Each year, there is a different theme. Two years ago when I was a judge the first time, the theme was Star Wars (apt, given the Hoth-like landscape outside the hotel where ASPC is held), last year was Marvel, and this year was The Matrix.
The Mission: #ASPC2017 aims to stimulate collaborative learning, networking and stimulation of ideas for participants through hands-on, time-limited challenges. We are fiercely competitive, yet vastly helpful and extremely sharing (also across teams), realizing that collective learning is more important than personal gain!
More informally, I see several great outcomes of the challenge.
Demonstrate, use, and learn about the latest developments in the SharePoint ecosystem
Work together in teams that – though generally from the same company – may rarely get to work together. (On site client work keeps them separated much of the time.)
Step outside a normal comfort zone, outside a client context, and try some crazy stuff.
Meet and work with teams from other consulting companies in the region.
Have a truly great time.
The challenge is held at a beautiful hotel in the mountains outside Oslo. When it’s raining in the city, it’s usually snowing near the hotel. It’s a great facility with fantastic food – no cold pizza for this hackathon.
View from the bridge of the Nebuchadnezzar – courtesy David Parker – Tap or click to see the 3D version at Theta
So, we had all the ingredients for a great event:
Smart, motivated people
Judges from far away (we get the best deal, I think!). Joining me for the judging were: Benjamin Niaulin (Sharegate), Fabian Williams (K2), Yina Arenas (Microsoft), Scott Durow (Develop1), and David Walker (BVisual).
Each team decides what to build, with some connection (sometimes rather obscure) to the theme. The theme makes the event a lot more fun, and provides many opportunities for movie line quotes and strange scenarios.
We had a predefined list of categories upon which to judge each team’s work.
Awesome Code– Best practice around different technologies; What type of framework; BP on Platform chosen; Having a GitHub Repo; Nice Code / Commit / Issues // Commented
Go with the Flow– Workflow automation; Webhooks; Forms and process automation; Event receivers; CRM workflows
User Experience– User friendly, Usability, User interaction, Accessibility; Mobile; Responsive design
Geeky Bastards– Use iOT and other tech outside of O365 area; Mention Azure ML; Python or R; Bot Framework; Hololens; Tesla; AI, Cortana, Alexa, etc
Power User Love– Your solution can easily be extended or used by “Power Users” to do more with it.
Mile High Club– Cloud services; Azure functions; Microsoft Graph; AWS, Lambda; Cloud APIs
Team Spirit– Open your code so others can use it; Be a good team; Happy camper; Help others; Blogs sharing what you have learned
Dynamics Dynamite– Use of Dynamics 365 in the solution. This was a new area for many of the teams, but a few found some CRM experts to bring along with them.
Bonus Challenge – Visio – Develop custom shapes, connect them to data, and embed them in SharePoint. Hint: There’s some great new stuff coming here very soon, so keep an eye out for an announcement! We got a bit of a preview as part of the challenge, and it’s not your grandfather’s Visio anymore. (Did you know Visio first came out in 1991?)
Scott Durow did a yeoman’s job of keeping score during the event using Dynamics 365 to capture the data as we went along, and Power BI to display it. If you click on the image below, you can see the final, live scoreboard.
As you can see, the PuzzlePart Appsters took the competition this year. I believe that makes it 3 / 7 for them. If you’d like to see some of what they were able to build, take a look at the Team Blogs on the ASPC site. The Appsters’ intro video for the final presentation is over on YouTube:
I’d love to see this hackathon / challenge idea reproduced elsewhere. I’ve been to several other hackathons as a judge, and this one has something special going for it. The combination of factors: great location, company-based teams, entertaining theme, and admirable goals truly makes for something special that people return to year after year.
It’s very interesting and important to have events like these, made me realize how little I know. A perfect time to step out of the comfort zone and the work routine to explore ideas with like-minded folks in the industry. Seeing Bots interact with the Microsoft Graph, Hololens recognizing faces and storing the information in SharePoint, integrating Flows and PowerApps to CRM and our beloved platform…very exciting and more importantly, a great learning experience – Benjamin Niaulin
Reports from afield tell us that SharePoint user group participation has flagged (at least in the US). Perhaps events like these are the next evolution of the “user group” concept?
If you’d like to know more about ASPC so you could try to run a similar event, feel free to ping me and I can put you in touch with the appropriate person. Also, it would be great to see a few new teams at ASPC 2018!
Today Julie (@jfj1997) and I were working on a document together. As usual, since we’re “cobbler’s kids”, we were emailing a Word document back and forth.
No way! We decided to share the document from one of our OneDrives and started editing online. I’m in Oslo, Norway at the Arctic SharePoint Challenge (more about that in another post) and Julie is back home in New Hampshire, so we were working with both a geographical and time zone difference, just like many people do these days.
The co-authoring experience seems a lot better than either of us remembered it. (In fact, there have been improvements to the experience over the last few months – it’s hard to keep up!)
Here are the things we really liked about this little experience…
By clicking on Review / Show Edit Activity, we could see what the other had been up to. Because I’m at ASPC2017 as a judge, I was interrupted several times (which was totally appropriate), and when I turned back to the document, I could see what Julie had been up to.
As we were editing, we could easily see what the other was doing, as there were little colored flags which moved along with the edits as they happened. In essence, it meant that we could see each other’s cursors in the document. This helped not just to see what the other was doing, but also as we were each adding new ideas into the document, we were able to avoid stepping on each other’s toes.
At one point, it felt like it would be a good idea to discuss a certain point we were making in the document. By clicking on the Chat button, we got an embedded chat window within the editing experience where we could have that discussion (and give each other a little crap when it was merited).
As with many of the new things that roll out to Office 365, I have been skeptical of the utility of this co-authoring experience. However, having been through this single experience working on a document with Julie, I think both of us are likely to use it many more times. It’s not necessarily useful in every editing scenario, but in this case it moved us forward much more quickly than any of the previous ways we might have worked.