IT expert roundtable: Upgrading to Microsoft Teams from Skype for Business

IT expert roundtable: Upgrading to Microsoft Teams from Skype for Business


♫♫>>Hello, everyone, and welcome to today´s “I.T. Showcase Expert Roundtable” about how we upgrade to Microsoft Teams from Skype for Business. My name is Frank Delia, and I´ll be your host for today´s session. I have been helping our staff within Microsoft use the capabilities of Office 365 to communicate and collaborate since before they called it Office 365. Now my role includes enabling teamwork that spans our company, across geographies, time zones, and cultures, and also it helps Microsoft connect with our customers and partners. I´m happy to be here today with my colleagues from Core Services Engineering and Operations. This is your opportunity to ask questions of our experts and receive candid answers based on how we have adopted Microsoft Teams within the company. Let´s start by asking our experts to introduce themselves. How about we start with Eileen?>>Thank you, Frank.>>Hi, everyone. My name is Eileen. I´m a program manager. It´s so excited of being a journey to enable teamwork, and I focus on the testing, user sentiment, and the data analytics.>>Hi, everyone. My name is Sam Cosby, and I am a program manager, as well, on Frank and Eileen´s team, where we help enable teamwork throughout the company. My main focus is around live-event usage within the company, but as well as doing some other feature validations, as well.>>Thank you. My name is Jonathan Lewis. I am a senior service engineer here with Core Services Engineering. My team actually focuses on all of the communication and collaboration technologies, things like Exchange, SharePoint, and, of course, Teams, which is what we are here to talk about today. So, I have been involved with Teams, the journey, since day one, and what a journey it has been, and I´m excited to be here to share some of the key things we have learned along the way.>>Great. Thanks, everyone.>>Before we get started with the session, I want to let you know that you can submit your questions through the Q&A window. I´ll be watching for them here, and I´ll read questions out loud for our experts.>>We´ll do our best to get to all of your questions. If we do run out of time, we´ll collect the remaining questions and answer them in a document and post that, along with the on-demand version of the webinar on our microsoft.com/ITShowcase site. Alright. Let´s get started with the first question. “Where is Microsoft on its journey from Skype for Business to Teams, and how is Microsoft still working and using Skype for Business? Eileen?>>Yeah, I can share a little bit on that.>>Internally, from Microsoft perspective, almost all the users have been upgraded to Teams Only mode. We do have users still on Island mode, which means they have Skype for Business and Teams side by side. They still use Teams for Collaboration, but due to the region, there is some requirement for them to stay on the Island mode. Currently they are still there, but we have the continuous program to upgrade all the employees internally to be Teams Only. And before we upgrade users to be Teams Only, actually, we adopt to Teams internally and let everybody get familiar with Island mode, as there needs to be a learning curve to help users really understand what a difference between two tools and they need to feel comfortable. And we definitely will introduce more about our internal [indistinct] priorities and the lesson learned on the whole change management in the session.>>I might add in there just a couple of examples of people internally at Microsoft that are still using Skype for Business. It could be things like some of the regulations that we have in certain countries that don´t allow us to use Teams at the time, at this moment. It could be maybe some feature gaps. There aren´t very many anymore, but in the past, we had some feature gaps. Those are just a couple examples of why people might still be using Skype.>>Yeah.>>Great. Let´s see here. “What is step one for organizations –” “What is step one organizations should take to get ready for enabling Teams?”>>Yeah, absolutely. I would say the first thing that organizations need to prepare for is really understanding where they are at today on their migration story. Whether they´re in their infancy stages and haven´t addressed yet any movement to Teams or whether they are in the middle stage right now, trying to figure out where to move and how to move and get from that next point. Ultimately understanding that user sentiment is gonna be key toward your success.>>Great. Next question here. “What is the most important success factor for organizations switching from Skype for Business to Teams?”>>I have to choose just one?>>[ Chuckles ]>>There´s a lot, but, in my opinion, the most important success factor, actually, is giving your users guidance, helping them use the new technology. There are some differences between how they worked in Skype for Business and how they will work in Teams. So help your users along. Give them some guidance. Give them some training. Help them get familiar with how best to use Teams and how to use it in the right way. That will help them be a lot more productive, and, frankly, it will drive adoption as you go through the journey.>>Great. Let´s see here. “How does Microsoft provision the key metrics to measure the Teams upgrade success? Eileen, that´s sort of your area.>>Yeah. That´s my area. Yeah. A lot of the time, when you are on a journey to upgrade a user from Skype for Business to Teams, or adopt to Teams, you may get a very common question from your stakeholder, from your users regarding where we are. Are we using it? How many users use it? So lots of the questions from the change management perspective really led us before the journey really identify what the key metrics we want to identify and to specify to really measure the success. We actually go through three aspects of that journey. The first one is the telemetry perspective, like quality, right? If we join the call, join the meeting on Teams, in terms of the previous experience, do we see the service [indistinct]? The second aspect is the usage. If users are on Teams or they´re in Island mode or in other mode, do we see they switch their volume from Skype for Business to Teams? The third part is the user sentiment. So we have all the telemetry. We want to compare the objective with the subjective feedback to see if the user will acknowledge the experience. So those are the three areas we are looking to and we did identify the set of the metrics for us to really go through on a daily basis, really track if our upgraded journey is on the right track or we need to figure out the specific challenge. Yeah. Okay. Next question coming in here. “How do you differentiate content that should be in Teams versus the corporate SharePoint site?” I think it´s a little bit about the corporate SharePoint site, what that means for us? I know that — I can think of a couple aspects. One is, what´s the difference between, like, the corporate level content versus the content that Teams are actively working on in, sort of in a more dynamic way? You know, in an interchange, collaboration everyday kind of way. That´s two ways. I know we have some authoritative portals where that kind of information goes. Definitely part of SharePoint.>>Yeah. I would add to that as well. So the files that are gonna reside in your team specifically are gonna be, obviously, team focused. The files that are gonna be on your corp SharePoint across the board, whether it be your global site or whether it be a specific site of some other degree, you can differentiate the ability for those files to be segmented to those user bases. So in a nutshell, Teams files should be allocated towards the team that´s gonna consume that, while anything on the site collection, as a whole, would more or less be for the mass audience within the company.>>Yeah, I also want to add to that. As Frank and Sam already mentioned, on Teams, all the files really specific to the workstream which, really, people rely on to get the job done on a daily basis. The corp SharePoint, actually, the website can be extended as a tab within the team if the general channel, for example, in their team want to really get connected with the corp information on daily basis. That, basically, can be a differentiation for your reference.>>I think it´s also important to note that when you store a file in a team or a channel, you are actually storing that on SharePoint on the back end. So there´s — To me, it kind of gets down to what fits your work flow and your work style best. That´s what you should use and where you´re most comfortable.>>Definitely.>>Excellent. Excellent. Next question coming here. “What work is required to prepare meeting-room devices for the upgrade to Teams?”>>I can take that one. Yeah, this is something that, I think, can get lost in the shuffle when you are upgrading to Teams, is your meeting-room devices. So we did, actually, a fair amount of work up front to make sure that all of our devices were Teams compatible. And that´s what you need to do before you start actually driving people to use Teams for meetings. ´Cause if you start driving them to use meetings and your devices aren´t compatible to Teams, then you´re gonna have some problems. So we definitely did a lot of work up front. We did a lot of testing and made sure that all of our devices that are in our meeting rooms across the company were fully compatible to Teams.>>Okay, kind of continuing a little bit on that meetings theme. “Do Teams Live Events have the same feature capabilities as Skype Meeting Broadcast?>>Yeah, I can take that one. Yes. So, today, all functionality that was within Skype Meeting Broadcast is in Teams Live Events. Teams Live Events, as well, have significantly greater and more feature-rich scenarios, such as the producer capability in Live Events today is vastly expanded in the presenter views that were in Skype Meeting Broadcast in the past. As well as some of capabilities that are coming down the pipe to be able to view Live Events in different mediums versus only having the ability to do so in Skype Meeting Broadcast. Another really awesome feature, as well, that isn´t talked about as much is the ability to actually produce and/or present from Teams on Mac clients. Previously in Skype Meeting Broadcast, there was no ability to do that, which obviously drove an audience away. So now that we have gained that functionality, it enables a richer experience overall.>>Yeah, like you and I were talking about the other day, Sam, I want to just reiterate that the real changes in where I saw the huge leap forward, going from Skype Meeting Broadcast to Live Events is really in that producer role. You actually now have the ability to queue up what´s gonna come next. So you have one screen that shows what´s happening live, and you have another screen where you can queue up. Like, let´s say you have another speaker coming in and you want to make sure they´re ready to go and not staring off in the distance. It´s really — It makes it so much easier to produce these events.>>It creates a better event overall, top to bottom.>>I agree.>>Alright. Great. Next question here. “How should you plan an upgrade to Teams Only? Department-wise or just switching the whole company to Teams Only mode if it affects more than 10,000 users?”>>I can try to tackle this question. So it kind goes into one of the questions that was answered initially. It´s really depending on where you´re at today. You know, depending on if you want to, organizationally, push everyone to Teams Only automatically, or do you want to — Or where are you at today when it comes to your upgrade policy? Are you on Islands mode? Are you on SFB only? Are you on SFB with Teams Collab? I would say it really depends on where you are at today with your user base. So let´s say out of the 10,000, all 10,000 are on SFB only. It may not be the best thing to enable them tomorrow for Teams Only, without there being some adoption strategy, communication to the end users let them know how to handle this new upcoming change.>>Just to kind of add on to that, I know within our own environment, we took the approach, starting with an narrower audience, so we better understood that Teams Only experience helped us learn and actually produce materials and information, like you´re saying, and allowed us to prepare the rest of our audience so we can — That was a learning opportunity.>>Yeah.>>And that said, we mentioned Islands mode a couple of times. I want to make sure everybody knows what we´re talking about. That means you have some people still using Skype for Business primarily, other people using Teams primarily. And my recommendation there is once you make that — You know, you prepared your users. You´re ready to go. I would move to a Teams Only mode as quickly as possible because the Islands mode can be a little bit confusing. Users are kind of asking the questions. “If I send a text from Skype to somebody who´s on Teams, are they gonna get it? Are they gonna get it in Teams? Or is it gonna show up in Skype?” So there´s all these scenarios that can be confusing to users. So once you make that call, I do recommend you get the Teams Only as quickly as possible.>>Just to add to that, as well, our public documentation also states exactly what you just said. If you´re going to be in Islands mode, make sure to make it as quickly as possible because of some of those nuances that your end-users either currently do see or are going to see if they get into that stage.>>And we definitely had confusion at times internally, even at Microsoft.>>Yeah.>>Another strategy, I was gonna say, maybe talk a little bit about, organization-wise, how we proceeded.>>That is what I want to add. Internally, our practice is we actually really provisioned the upgrade org by org because lots of the users, based on their role, they use Teams in a different way — in sales, engineering. They all talk with different audience. So we talked to our leadership from different organizations, just to have a whole timeline planned before we upgrade any user to be Teams Only. In short, people who collaborate more often together can be on Teams Only together, as closer as possible so that we´re not break any user communication collaboration opportunity. That actually is a success indicator for us, yeah.>>And something you said really resonated with me. You really need to have, once you´ve have made this call internally, you need to have that support, full support, from the top down. So your senior leadership team needs to be helping you drive that message. This is the technology we are moving to and get your users excited. So I think it´s really important to have that support.>>There is a related question to that around, how do you evaluate that readiness, and what training efforts to do or how to optimize your training based on that experience.>>Yeah, there is lots of, like, different aspects from the readiness perspective. We started with in-person training and see how it works. And then, actually, after the people who joined the training, we monitor their usage. We really realized when we introduce the level one-on-one with the Teams is. Plus, how to really set up the channel and a team aligned to their daily job. After those two sessions, actually, people who join the training bring the practice back to their own immediate team, and we immediately see lots of the members who even didn´t join those trainings, but under the same organization, start to have the Teams Only journey proactively by themselves. Yeah.>>I´m gonna –>>No.>>I just — I´m — How do you know? How does the signal that people are really adopting Teams? ´Cause it´s kind of hard to tell. Are you asking them?>>So, for sure, after the Teams training — first the journey of the in classroom training — we did a survey. But, afterwards, we really referred their usage, like, from the whole parity function prospective. Chat me in a call. Do we see users start to use it? If we see that, it would basically measure two metrics. How many users use it on a daily basis versus how many chat me in a call. Made originally by individual user, and we see the upward trend gradually once users start to join the training.>>Where are you getting those metrics from?>>That´s a great question. You may have all the questions. In your mind, like, “Oh, how can I get those data”? So every organization really have the Tenant and the Office 365 Tenant admin center hosts the activity report, and that is our starting point to really monitor the parity function. And in addition to the activity reports, there is also the usage reports on the Tenant if you join as a Teams admin or Tenant admin, which we can really explore lots of the information like a seven-day rolling up — a 30-day rolling up, 90-day rolling up, how their chat me in a call, conversation look like. How many users, instead of using the call functionality, they use “other” activities, which they call under a Tenant admin center, which is all the information available for the Tenant admin to really dig into detail, yeah.>>Thank you. Let´s see. “How does Microsoft put governance in place internally as part of our rollout of groups and teams?”>>Great question.>>I can take first stab at that one.>>Okay. Governance is — I´m glad somebody brought that up, ´cause in my opinion, governance is actually one of the most important things you can talk about. Without governance, you´re gonna get probably a bloated system. We had to go through this same thing with SharePoint. We had to make sure that, with SharePoint, that if you created a site, you had to have two owners, not just one. At least one of them had to be a full-time equivalent. So we are basically carrying that over into Teams — very similar governance policies that we have been putting in place. And so making sure that we don´t have people spinning up a whole bunch of teams and then leaving.>>Yeah.>>So it´s really important that you stay on top of that. So essentially, and I´ll give you just an example. We basically reach out to people and say, “Okay, you created this team a year ago. Do you still need it? Are you still using it? And so we reach out to our users, and if they don´t respond, then we will actually at least cut off access to that team and see if anybody comes out of the woodwork and screams, ´cause there are certain scenarios where they might only use it once a year for like a giving campaign. We have a yearly giving campaign. So these are all things you need to really take into account to make sure that you don´t have an unmanageable system like too many teams.>>Yeah.>>The other guidance I give people is, create fewer teams and more channels. Keep that in the back of your mind, because, otherwise, you´re gonna get 50,000 teams over here on the left, and that´s a little unwieldy.>>To kind of piggyback off some of the things you were saying, I guess, in terms of what Microsoft does as a whole, we did implement that same strategy when it came to the SharePoint site owners scenario, where if you have a team that only has one owner, you´re gonna get an alert asking if this is actually in use. And if you don´t reply back, you don´t add a secondary owner, that team will eventually get deleted into a soft deletion state, which then you have 30 days to basically act on whether or not you want to let it go or you want to add it back. On top of that, as well, we have some scenarios such as expiration policy, which you kind of mentioned, as well, with, like, the Give Campaign team, where they may not use it for a certain amount of time but they´re still — that team still needed to be there for the data that exists already within that team. And so you can set expiration policies, and we do, too, based on if the renewal date for how long that team exists. So things like that come up as well. And then we also have, like, classification types, as well, which when you create a group, you have the confidential versus public and things like that.>>Yeah, exactly.>>And one of the beauties of it is, because it´s all based on Office 365 groups, those policies can be applied broadly, regardless of whether it´s the team´s experience or SharePoint.>>Exactly.>>Exactly.>>Okay. Here´s a question around how Microsoft manages external access in teams and groups.>>I can take a stab at that. Yeah, so today we do allow guest access. So depending on the way you´re describing external communication, so guest access allowance within any team that has warrant to allow guests in that, when then if you have a guest, that´s external communication. But we also have Federation to — or open Federation — to allow anyone internally to be able to I.M. and chat with someone who is capable, either within Skype for Business or a Teams client. So we actually have that in a pretty open state from that regard.>>Yeah, and in that situation, it´s really important people that people understand which teams have external access and which don´t. You want to make sure that if you have external participants that you are managing what you share very carefully. And so we do a lot of training. We have some compulsory training every year about sharing data and being smart about how you share the data. So I think it´s really important that you do that and make sure your users are really educated in that space. You don´t want to over-share. So that´s just one of the things I would mention with external access.>>Yeah.>>Yes, I´m adding just one word supplementally to that. Before we really share with you that we also did internal tasks, especially within our team, just to ensure we fully understand what does that mean, if we enable our capability. Like a guest access versus Federation was one of the confused items for all users, even for us at the very beginning. So we are on the journey with our user to be very honest, share with them our lessons learned, and continuously evolve concentrating our training and learning material to ensure everything is up-to-date. Give the clarity.>>Yeah.>>Yep.>>Good. Okay. Here´s one around adoption strategy. “How did Microsoft strategize and execute a phased change plan?” Was it — include H.R., communications, I.T., marketing? Those various business groups.>>Yeah.>>All of the above. [ Laughter ] Yeah. Driving adoption is, once again, one of those things that doesn´t always get paid attention to. So in the past, even we at Microsoft — And I´m talking quite a while ago. I´ve been around 25 years. I´ve been around a while. But we would roll out new technologies, let´s say a new version of Office that new features and functionality, but we wouldn´t take the time to teach our users how to use it. We just kind of throw it over the wall and say, “Hey, go forth and be productive.” What we found was when we sat down and kind of thought about how users use our technologies and how they might use them more effectively and train them how to do that, that the adoption actually happens a lot more quickly and a lot more effectively. So I think that´s really important.>>One thing I noticed having been involved in a few different adoption programs with various capabilities, this time around, we are closely engaged with a group we have that reaches out into the field, right? So it wasn´t us from the I.T. shop necessarily engaging directly all the time one-to-one but we actually have people who work with those groups all the time. We coordinate closely with them so they had the information to provide and, in turn, they brought requirements back to us that allowed us to be on top of recognizing, for example, that people needed more clarity around how it would work when you have some people in your organization using teams and others still using Skype for Business.>>I take it you are alluding to the Champions program.>>There´s Champions, but also there´s — We call that –>>A comms leads, which connect with the stakeholder on a daily basis. And, yeah, Frank, exactly, you are right. First of all, identify the time line. Who will go first? Who will be next? For what reason? Before you land it, really talked with every organization stakeholder, get their buy-in. They may ask the question, what does that mean for their organization? We should give the good answer to them. So they are buying, and, for sure, in the region, because Microsoft is across the world, and lots of the employees in different time zones, which need to understand and keep on this speed. And we realize to scale that up, we need to enable the field. I.T. manager and account manager not only talk to users but keep talking to their managers and all the reporting chain to get all the users understand and from up to down, all the managers can support them, the user will understand will happen. Champion is another thing. Like, they have [indistinct] They are so passionate to really share their [indistinct] with all the people around. And we just have a different aspect, really connect to the whole change management approach to ensure communication, information, and people who engage can be scale up and reach out to all the individual users, as many as possible.>>Yeah, and I´ve been involved in a lot of Champions programs here at Microsoft. I don´t think I´ve ever seen one as passionate and as chatty as the Champions for Teams. It´s been one of the most successful programs that I´ve seen. We´ve involved the product group. They´ll come in, and they´ll talk about things that are coming up in the road map. And it´s kind of funny, ´cause when I can´t join the Champions meeting, I can always tell when it´s happening because I have Teams on my mobile phone, and it works, actually, really well on a mobile. But it´s funny, because they are very passionate, and my phone will start blowing up when I forget to turn off my notification. So I can always tell when the Champions are online because there´s a lot of really good collaboration and conversations that go on with that team.>>I guess just to add one last thing to the Champions portion, is we actually built, like, an internal leaderboard for those champions to kind of see who can be the greatest champion of the champions, which, you know, enables, again, that adoption and fun, if you will, within that scheme to try to make that change occur, whether it be for one thing or another within that.>>Yeah.>>And we even gave them a digital badge that they can actually put on their picture, their profile picture, and it´s kind of a badge of honor for our users. They really take it seriously. So it´s been an incredible program, in my opinion.>>Okay. Here´s — maybe a little controversial. “I´m hearing” — from users, I guess, apparently — “that the Teams client is too fat and they would like a more streamlined chat client like Skype. My feeling is that this negates all the benefits of Teams collaboration.” What do we think about that? How do you weigh the demand for something that´s very simple against the richer set of collaborations? Get those Teams offers.>>I can start.>>Sure.>>Yeah. So maybe user didn´t think about the communication versus collaboration, as two sides always happen together organically. But from the whole platform perspective, user not only have communication like a chat, join meeting, or group chat, but also they have collaboration needs. Lots of the chat or meeting was triggered by the collaboration needs, and in the past, Skype was, like, focused on communication. I can join the meeting, I can have a chat, but the whole root cause which drives those actions are sitting around Office 365 separately. So we heard lots of the voice say I actually use the whole set of Office 365 toolkit daily from morning to the end. How I switch across different platforms. Teams bring everything together, not to force people, only stay on that window, but, naturally, teamwork is on there. There is demands and incentive to really start the work. I need to collaborate, and I need to chat. I need to join the meeting. So that following the nature workflow to support the user easily reach out to functionality within one window. Actually, it´s sort of improved the productivity.>>Yeah. Great. Let´s see. “More tactically, what happens if a team is deleted by administrator?” What happens with the files that are associated with the team?>>Yeah, so I guess I can tackle that.>>So, every team is a unified group on the back and an O365 group. And so once that gets deleted, that gets into a soft deleted state within that 30-day period. If an owner needs to either access those files, needs to redeem that team back into an enabled state, they have that 30-day window to do so. However, if after 30 days, that does get deleted, then the files associated with that team and group are also deleted. And so we want to make sure that if a team does become in a deleted state, that the communication back to that owner, the owner is aware of them being in a deleted state, that their files could also be deleted within 30 days.>>Yeah, and I think one of the things we also do is we do have a window of time. So let´s say somebody leaves the company, and we´re gonna go ahead, and they´re not gonna use that team any longer. We typically give their manager at least a window of time to make sure that they go out, and if there´s anything really critical that we don´t want to delete, then we make sure the manager is able to recover that content.>>And just to piggyback on one of the governance questions we had earlier, this is also a partial reason why we want two owners in every team and not just one, because in a scenario like this where someone else can act on behalf as an owner or someone in that team, if the files and/or chat or something within that team is needed, so therefore the other owner can act on behalf of the other owner.>>Correct.>>So, does that come together? Can there be an archive strategy related to these capabilities you´re talking about?>>Yeah, there is a way. Before people really say, “I need to delete it,” there´s alternative for them to archive. There´s option. So “archive” means the whole team become read-only mode. The user may not contribute but they need to refer back to the existing documentation or content there or to persist in the chat history. And user can define if they archive it or delete it. Depends on if they really need to refer to the historical content.>>Yeah, exactly.>>So the team owners are in a position to do that archiving.>>Yes>>I guess the other side, not archiving. But on the I.T. side, where we enforce it, is really just around when our team is not used, then we just remove it.>>Yeah. It kind of goes back into the usage portion, as well. So if you know there´s one owner and there´s no usage, and someone´s spun up five teams for testing purposes or things like that, then that´s a good example of when to probably go ahead and start that process of going into the deletion mode. But, again, it´s more around usage and making sure that the owners are aware, because you don´t want to delete something that actually is in use and you mistakenly think it´s not.>>Yeah. Exactly.>>Okay. There´s a question about migrating on premise file shares to teams or SharePoint online. Has anyone done that?>>Well, yeah. We have done that internally. We used to be heavy users of file shares. But basically when we moved to SharePoint, that became kind of a point of discussion with our users. Stop using file shares. You should be using SharePoint. it´s much more collaborative. You can share things out more easily, especially when you go online — SharePoint online. So we definitely took that journey, but we did that a long time ago. We´ve been trying to get away from file shares. I mean, I still store certain files on my laptop, but I don´t use — For the most part, we don´t use file shares at all.>>Partly because we make it super-hard for people to create a file share. I don´t think we even offer a service.>>Yeah.>>We sort of kind of do, but that´s only certain situations. Only certain scenarios.>>I think some of the rationale we think of as we want to be able to protect our content. And since Office 365 provides these management´s solutions that we´ve been talking about, we can do that readily but in just one place, rather than having to manage file shares independently.>>It´s kind of like the shift to — people used it send attachments all the time in e-mail. And now if you send an attachment, you get kind of beat up because people don´t want attachments in e-mail. They want to be able to go out — number one, because then you have all these different versions of your file all over the place. They might forward on an attachment. So it´s kind of like that shift, when we went, “Okay, now you should be sending a link or a U.R.L. to the document that you´re gonna be collaborating on. That way, you have the definitive document. That´s another — It was kind of very similar to when we moved off of file shares.>>Yeah.>>Here´s a question about guest users. “Can anyone be a guest user, even if they do not have an Office 365 subscription?>>I can answer this. Yes. However, any guest in an Office 365 Tenant has to have — it´s called an M.S.A. account, a Microsoft Service Account, affiliated back to that account. So to answer your question, no, they don´t actually need an Office 365 subscription. However, to actually access the Tenant that they´ve been granted access to, they have to either have an Office 365 Tenant or the M.S.A. style account, and that would be like a Gmail, Live, Outlook.com.>>You can associate that with any kind of consumer?>>For the most part, yeah. So I think we have some general guidelines, but outside of those, yeah, it´s consumer style.>>I think Hotmail even falls into that category. I still have a Hotmail account. So that would allow me, if I left the company, to still be external.>>To also add to this, too, as a Tenant admin, you can actually specify the guest user domains that you want to actually have allowed. So if you´re really close and partner with a certain company, you can have that one domain as the only type of guest that you actually allow, versus these consumer-style M.S.A. accounts, which could be useful in certain scenarios or not. So just important to note that, as well.>>Yeah. Also from the user-experience perspective, external user will not automatically pull as a guest until they really click the invitation. Like, I would deem this invitation. So when the team owner at external account into a specific team as a guest, it would trigger invitation e-mail to that user. The user have the right to say, “I accept or not.” So everything really under control and depends on how people really work on that.>>And then once you accept, depending on organization, you can have a criteria page. By you accepting this, you make sure you´re click okay, based on these guidelines.>>Yeah. And you don´t just suddenly show up having an account to go into Microsoft Teams. It´s good that they have to accept.>>Okay. More questions coming in here. “Is there a plan for a Teams client that respects Windows U.I. conventions?” I imagine — I don´t know if this to notifications or the way Teams integrates with the operating system capabilities.>>So I guess to answer to that, we might need a little bit more data on the question itself. But in terms of, like, notifications, yes. In terms of protocol types, yes. But I guess we might need a little bit more clarification on the question as a whole.>>Yeah, would — specifics.>>Yeah, if it needs specifics, please feel free to ask us.>>Yeah. We have a follow-on question.>>Got it Okay. For this next question here, “Having chat calls, files, and every team and channel trapped in a single window makes common tasks like reviewing file chat much more difficult than when it is Skype, and being able to put the chat in one window versus another. Is there something impossible with Teams?”>>Why, yes, there is. [ Laughter ]>>That´s a common question, a common challenge, let´s just say.>>Yeah, we do have a multi-window solution coming down the pipeline which will allow for users to have, whether it be chat options opened up in different windows or your files and document share opened up in a different window. There´s work being done to make sure that it gets progressed.>>Yeah. We´ve gotten lots of feedback on that, and we´ve taken that to heart. So, as Sam said, there is a solution coming. I think all three of us are probably testing it right now. We´re in an earlier ring so we get features and functionality before the basic users at Microsoft. So, yeah, it´s coming, and it´s definitely needed.>>Yep.>>Got it here. Just reading the next questions. Let´s see. “Because we have a few new players in the hardware space for voice in Teams, is there recommendations for your self-providing audio and video collaboration rooms and end users who require desk sets?>>Well, I´ll handle the desk-set question. So, I was actually one of the first seven sites when I was in — I actually did a stint in Sydney, Australia for four years, which was a real tough gig. But we were one of the first sites to go live with Voice over IP, which was called Enterprise Voice. I did allow people to choose whether they wanted a headset or whether they wanted a desk set. Pretty much everybody wanted both, but what I did was I kind of walked around using my laptop, and I could walk down the hall carrying on a conversation with my headset. And people saw that and thought it was pretty cool. And actually, you know, the desk sets started kind of gathering dust. So, think through that strategy. People are gonna want to have that old familiar desk set, but are they actually gonna use it? So, that´s one thing that I would make sure you take into account.>>Mm-hmm. And I know as a practice across the company, we don´t by default provide…>>Yep.>>…you know, fixed devices on desks anymore. I mean, you can get a headset or a speaker or whatever. There are some businesses that opt to allocate their specific budgets because their users, you know, really want those kinds of devices, and that´s the prerogative of the business.>>Yep.>>But broadly, we don´t take a stance that that´s part of our standard any longer.>>And unless somebody very specifically asks for a desk set, they will typically get a headset.>>Yep.>>Got it. And do you have any info on our collaboration-rooms strategy?>>In the collaboration-rooms? You know, we work with multiple vendors for reasons that are really specific to Microsoft because we need to have vendors that, you know, work well with our technologies. We do tend to have a list of vendors and devices that we prefer. In the past, we used to have, actually, a standards list that we could, you know, share out. In the rooms themselves, once again, we do use, you know, a combination of vendors. We use, you know, Logitech, you know, Yealink. I mean, we use probably most any vendor that does have something that´s Teams-compatible. But we do try to standardize. In the past, we used to have kind of a hodgepodge. You´d go into a room, and it might be a completely, you know, different experience than the room you were in before. So, we are actually trying to drive standards while we still make sure that we´re working well with these other vendors. So, that´s something I would recommend, as well. It´s really a great experience when you can walk into a room and it´s just exactly like the room that was over in this building over here.>>Yeah.>>So the standards piece is really important.>>So, I guess in a similar way to the way we deploy technology, we might try a number of different devices, you know, from a pilot mode, but then, for user-experience purposes, we want to standardize as much as possible just to make it easier.>>Which kind of goes back into the whole making sure that the systems themselves were Teams-capable before even someone would walk into the room, right? Having the ability to have a meeting that´s already on, you joining that meeting automatically from your desktop or from your laptop and just being able to — for it to recognize that you´re in that room and that meeting´s already started is a great user experience. And we get good feedback based on that.>>Yeah, and we´ve put a ton of work into the meeting-room technologies to make sure that they´re a one-click-join experience. We didn´t always have that. And there was a period of time when, frankly, it took — I don´t know — 8 to 10 minutes to actually get a meeting up and running, which was really unproductive. So we´ve really done a ton of work to be able to just walk in, have that one-click-join experience, and our users are really reacting to it. It´s been a huge benefit.>>Yeah, actually, internally, getting meeting room all compatible for a Teams experiencing and ensuring the experience for a user is a prerequisite for us to enable the Outlook meetings — Teams meeting adding and also the prerequisite for us to launch anyone to be Teams-only because we want to ensure the experience is good. Meeting is a very big compatibility enabled by Teams. Yeah, that´s also, yeah, relevant to our change management.>>And related, while you were kind of talking about meetings in general, was there an effort to convert Skype for Business meetings to Teams meetings?>>Well, we are on — Sam, you can weigh in later. When we are on a journey, we actually didn´t automatically switch all the — migrate all the Skype for Business meetings to Teams because we really respect a user may need to keep those as Skype for Business meeting when other users, even externally, still use Skype. But at this moment, there is more opportunity for a user — I know, like, Sam, you probably want to weigh in on that experience.>>Yeah, yeah. So, depending on upgrade mode, there´s some scenarios that come into play. So, you know, where you are on your journey and your strategy, if you are in SFB-only mode, you´re gonna have your Skype meetings, you know, up to Islands mode, continue to be a Skype meeting across the board. However, when you move to Teams-only today, you actually will have those meetings migrated from Skype for Business to Teams. However, there is a caveat to that. You can actually, as an admin, state “no” to that because you still might want a certain user to have their meetings in Skype for Business for, you know, reasons for them. And so it´s really just dependent on the user´s, like, scenario. But ultimately, yeah, if you´re in a certain mode, that´s where the meetings go, I guess, across the board.>>Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, I totally agree with that. But there are definitely scenarios where people specifically wanted their meetings left in Skype for Business mode. One of the reasons is because we know that all of our users aren´t necessarily gonna jump to Teams. We´re still gonna have customers that are using Skype for Business. And we need to make sure that that Skype for Business experience is as good as it can possibly be. So we can´t just leave it behind.>>Yeah.>>Got it.>>And that kind of goes back into the whole upgrade story, right? Depending on where you are today is really important and imperative to that user´s outcome and experience. You know, if a user is in SFB-only, they´re gonna have Skype meetings. If they´re on SFB with Teams collab, they´re still gonna have Skype meetings, all the way up to when they get moved over to Teams-only. Then at that point, they´ll be Teams meetings. So, just depending on your users and what they´re used to is important, as well.>>Got it. Let´s talk for a moment about support. There´s a question — “We´d like to understand about the support requirements. How do we do it? Was headcount added? Or were existing roles tasked with new work? What was the impact and the effort?”>>I can take the first stab at that one. No, we didn´t add headcount. We actually needed to basically upscale our support folks that were working on Skype for Business, upscale them into, how do you support Teams versus Skype for Business? What are the differences, if there are any? I personally actually — I work really closely with the support organizations here internally at Microsoft. And so I actually set up some meetings with the product group themselves, the architects. I actually had the guy who was one of the main architects to sit down and walk them through the architecture and the areas where you might have problems. So, we really definitely did a lot of training with them. I also set up another session where one of the product-group guys walked our guys through how to read Teams logs. The logs are something we really rely heavily on to support it. But we didn´t actually add headcount. We just really, you know, made do with the resources we already had, but made sure that they were fully, you know, brought up to speed on how to support it properly.>>Yeah.>>And I guess I can talk on behalf of support. I actually used to be a support escalation engineer, where I used to work on Skype for Business. And we did have to adapt and adjust. But like Jonathan said, there wasn´t, like, a headcount adjustment because the pattern of case flow was, you know, obviously heavy in Skype for Business, little bit transitioned into Teams. There was a, you know, learning curve in between that middle stage, and now it´s focused mostly on just Teams when it comes to the support escalation engineer role.>>Yeah, you´re definitely gonna see a decrease in Skype for Business calls and an increase in Teams as long as people are adopting teams. That´s what you want to see.>>Yep.>>So, you just kind of — You know, you´re gonna see one go up, one go down, and you handle it with the same amount of headcount. At least, that´s what we did at Microsoft.>>Yeah, actually, when we are on this change-management journey, whenever we start an organization to be Teams-only or postmortem after it is finished, we invite the support team to the daily war room just to review if we see any peak on the volume, like any unexpected exit and start, like validate if the volume really switch. And by doing that, actually, support team is on the same journey with us. There´s no surprise to really shock them and say, “I didn´t know that happened.” And we will be on the same page with them to fully understand what´s going on when we upgrade users to Teams-only. So, that is another practice, actually, we see, like, how different organizations really can tie it together.>>I guess just to add one other thing to that, is, the Teams logs — So, coming from support, the Teams logs are very rich in terms of the — You know, it may not be the same UccApilog like you´re used to in Skype for Business days. But it´s a plain-text rich format that you can actually follow pretty intuitively, you know, with just a plain text reader, whether it be, like, Notepad or, you know, other. And you can actually read through it and kind of gain some understanding as to, like, not only what´s going on, but how Teams actually works as a whole.>>Yeah, the logs are absolutely — We pretty much rely the Teams logs and Fiddler traces…>>Yep.>>…when we have issues that are not really glaringly something that the user´s not doing right or something like that. So, when we have to do actual troubleshooting, logs, Fiddler traces — those are the things we live in.>>Exactly.>>Alright, we got a question around some of the calling capabilities. “Do we have any updates about when location-based routing will be available?”>>Mm.>>I know…>>My favorite topic.>>…soon. I know there´s a lot of work being done on that. So, going back to Jonathan´s statement previously where we have some users that are still using Skype for Business calling today because of LBR not being enabled…>>Right.>>…in those regions. And so once LBR is — It´s actually being currently tested in beta internally within our organization. And so once we actually get clearance on that, that´s when we´re gonna roll it out to the masses, which then we can convert those users to be Teams-only.>>Yeah, and that´s absolutely critical to us being able to work around some of the countries where we have challenges with, you know, their local policies and things like that. So, location-based routing is really the key to being able to move it into countries that are a little bit more stringent, I guess.>>We do have LBR on the Roadmap, on the Office 365 Roadmap. So, I don´t know where it states today, but I do know there´s some testing being done internally. So, coming soon.>>Hey, back to hardware in meetings rooms, is there a standard hardware for Microsoft Teams Rooms that we´ve adopted?>>Yeah, we actually do have — We actually coined the phrase “Microsoft Teams Rooms.” Typically it´s gonna be a Skype room system V2. It´s gonna involve in many cases a trio coupled with Rigel, which is — helps us manage the content itself. So, that tends to be where we´ve been focusing. I mean, we do still have things like Surface Hub rooms. The Surface Hubs were really popular. But in general, we´ve been really focused on standardizing on what we call Microsoft Teams Rooms, which is that standard configuration.>>We have a multitude of partners, as well, in this space. And I know we have a published document out there that kind of states, “Here are the certified devices that are MTR-ready, Microsoft Teams Rooms-ready.” So, I would make sure to check that out, as well, and make sure that either what you´re using today is certified or get something that is certified to ensure that end user experience is pleasant.>>Yeah. And I´m gonna go back to the standards piece. It is a really smart move to try to standardize on using the same general class of devices.>>Okay. Okay, got a few more questions here. I know we are slim on time. This could be the last one. Let´s see. “Are external users able to share their screen in a Teams meeting?”>>Yes.>>I think so.>>Yes. Yeah. It´s a really — When we upgrade a user, it´s a journey. On clients, definitely. If user joined a meeting from their Teams client, they can share a screen. But not all the Web clients at the moment support it.>>Mm-hmm.>>So, little by little, gradually until now, not only Edge — I think Chrome — yeah, they can also share their desktop if they really log in.>>Yeah, and once again, it was a journey. Originally, really, if you had the rich client, you could share your screen. If you had the Web client, you couldn´t. So, these are all — And we took feedback from customers around that, as well. So, you know, it´s interesting. Kind of what we did when we first started down the path was we sat down and we said, “What are the minimum viable product — What´s the description of what we have to have in Teams before we can actually go to Teams-only mode? And that was actually one of them, was for external customers to be able to share their screens.>>Yeah.>>So, that´s part of the approach that we took, as well, and it´s probably not a bad idea for customers such as yourselves to do that, as well.>>And there are unique policy parameters that you can also add in via the Teams meeting policy that you can change towards your organization´s needs and wants.>>Exactly.>>Mm-hmm.>>Okay. Well, we are almost at the end of our time. And before we go, I´d like to ask each of you to share just a key takeaway with our audience. Let´s start with you, Jonathan.>>Okay. Well, big surprise, I´m gonna talk about giving guidance and training to your users. I know that´s been a bit of a theme throughout for me, but I can´t emphasize it enough. It will take you a huge step forward to not only giving your users a great experience with Teams — the more they know about how to use it, the better experience they´re gonna have — but it also, alternatively, drives adoption internally, as well. So, guidance, training. You´re probably gonna get questions around things like, “Now I´ve got this Yammer thing out there. I´ve got Teams. What do I use when?” So, you know, we talk to our users all the time. Yammer´s probably a better experience for when you´re doing broad communications, where Teams is better when you´re communicating with somebody that you work with every day. So, anyway, guidance, training. Get your users prepared before you just go full bore into it.>>Alright. Sam?>>Yeah, to add to some of the things Jonathan said, as well, it´s really critical — and as I mentioned previously — to know where you are today in your upgrade journey, whether you´re in your infancy stages of SFB-only or whether you´re in an Islands-mode stage, to identify how to push that next stage to become Teams-only. It´s critical towards user involvement and feedback that you can gain back from those users to identify some of the scenarios that you need to be able to drive that towards Teams-only.>>Alright. Eileen, what would you like to share with us?>>Yeah, my takeaway is, this is a journey. And we need to acknowledge all the users have their own learning curve, not only planning events and get all the content prepared, but need to engage all the users on a daily basis through the change-management approach, and, through that journey, also leverage the data, especially the usage data, to make your conversation powerful and show them what, in fact, it looks like, and also listen to the user, really correlate to, like, the user sentiment with the telemetry. So, that will make all the journey more helpful for the user experience.>>Completely agree.>>Yeah. For me, it´s critical to consider the shift to Teams not just as a point in time — I mean, you talk about a journey. You know, I want to say it´s a voyage in that the technical aspects in some ways are the most straightforward pieces. What I keep reminding myself is that, just as I continually ask myself, “How do I, as an individual, communicate effectively?” we have to ask ourselves as an organization, “How do we stay fresh and keep growing our capability to work together…”>>Yeah.>>”…in Teams?”>>Yep.>>Alright, well, great points, everyone. I want to let you know that the on-demand version of this roundtable will be posted soon to microsoft.com/ITShowcase, where you´ll find also related content, including case studies, blogs, and upcoming webinars. Thanks so much for joining us, and we hope to see you again in future webinars.>>Thanks, everyone.>>Thanks, everyone.>>Thank you. ♫♫

You May Also Like

About the Author: Oren Garnes

1 Comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *