SharePoint provides two central site types: team sites as digital workspaces and communication sites as digital information spaces. The choice is not a design question – it determines permissions, governance, Teams integration and long-term operations.
A common mistake in practice: the site type is chosen by visual preference. What actually matters is the usage pattern – do many people work on content together, or do many people read content created by a few authors?
🎯 At a Glance
Team site = workspace. Many authors, shared files and lists, Microsoft Teams integration. For projects, departments, construction files.
Communication site = information space. Few authors, many readers, curated content. For intranet, QM, HR and training portals.
Creating a communication site does not create a Microsoft 365 group – that is the key technical difference.
💡 The basic idea
Ask yourself a single question before deciding:
"Is work done together here – or is information published here?"
Work done together → team site. Information published → communication site.
A team site connects a team with shared content and resources: storing and co-authoring files, creating and managing lists, tracking project status and tasks. It is the right choice whenever several people actively work on the same content.
A communication site is designed for broad communication. The emphasis is not on co-authoring but on easily consumable, visually polished and curated information – a few maintain it, many read it.
| Criterion | Team site | Communication site |
|---|---|---|
| Primary purpose | Collaboration in a team, project or department | Broad communication and information |
| Audience | Defined group, project team, department | Broad audience, often the whole organisation |
| Authoring model | Many members create content | Few authors, many readers |
| Microsoft 365 group | Yes – connected by default | No – not created on setup |
| Teams integration | Excellent – Teams-connected workspaces | No native Teams connection; can be added as a tab |
| Permissions | Through the Microsoft 365 group or Teams | Through SharePoint groups (Owners/Members/Visitors) |
| Typical content | Documents, lists, tasks, project status | News, policies, reports, knowledge content |
| Lifecycle | Project-driven: create, use, archive | Long-lived: editorial care and review cycles |
Work through the questions in order – the first one that applies points the way:
| Question | Recommendation |
|---|---|
| Do several people actively work on content together? | Team site |
| Should Microsoft Teams be the central working surface? | Team site |
| Are tasks, calendars, Planner or operational lists involved? | Team site |
| Are there few authors and many readers? | Communication site |
| Is it about news, policies or knowledge transfer? | Communication site |
| Is the site a long-term knowledge source or a portal? | Communication site |
| Should several sites share a common navigation? | Hub site as the connecting structure |
| Are private or shared Teams channels involved? | Consider channel site governance |
💡 Enterprise rule
If the site is part of an operational work process, that points to a team site. If it is an information product, that points to a communication site. In mature environments both types are combined and connected through hub sites.
Alongside the two main types there are two supporting structures that matter in larger environments:
Hub sites connect related sites logically – with shared navigation, consistent design and a rollup of content such as news or documents. They replace the subsite structures used in the past, because standalone site collections with a hub association are more flexible.
Channel sites are created automatically for private and shared channels in Microsoft Teams. Each such channel receives its own SharePoint site with its own permission management, separate from the main team's site.
⚠️ Frequently overlooked
Private and shared channels create their own sites that are not covered by the main team's permissions. Using them without that awareness spreads content across several sites with separate governance – and leads to gaps in permission overview, archiving and reporting later on.
The site type determines the permission model. For team sites, membership and access run through the associated Microsoft 365 group or through Microsoft Teams – keeping the team, its files and connected services consistent. Communication sites have no Microsoft 365 group; here you work with SharePoint groups: Owners manage the site, Members maintain content, Visitors consume it.
Core rule at Teamsware
We never grant permissions to individual users or AD groups directly on sites, libraries or folders. Instead we work with SharePoint groups and place the Entra/AD groups inside them. Access is then controlled in one single place – and the group's permission level decides the rights.
This pays off especially on communication sites: keep the author circle deliberately small and scale the large reader group through an AD group inside the Visitors group – instead of maintaining hundreds of individual permissions.
For details, see the article "Using Microsoft 365 Groups and Entra Security Groups Correctly".
A modern information architecture separates the portal layer from the workspace layer: communication sites provide orientation and central information, while team sites form the operational layer for teams, departments and projects.
| Layer | Site type | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Company portal | Communication site | Intranet, home site |
| Topic portal | Communication site | QM portal, HR portal, training portal |
| Project workspace | Team site | Construction file, customer project, PMO workspace |
| Special channel | Channel site | Confidential project sub-area |
| Connecting structure | Hub site | Project portfolio hub, business unit |
🎯 Teamsware recommendation
This is how we currently use the two site types:
This separation keeps operational project work agile and the overarching steering layer stable – without mixing permissions and navigation.
💡 Quick reminder
Team site = we work together
Communication site = we inform
Hub site = we connect
Channel site = we deliberately separate
Teamsware GmbH · Leopoldstraße 31 · 80802 München · www.teamsware.eu