MS Teams adoption

Your context

  • An email and file-share focused communications culture
  • Desire to embrace MS Teams to reduce 'noise', and realise KM and InfoSec benefits
  • Limited change management resources to support the adoption journey

Your challenges

  • To quantify the realistic opportunity for MS teams adoption
  • To efficiently target change management interventions
  • To measure progress and demonstrate success to senior leadership

How Oxzeon's technology helps

  • Using your pre-existing data, we map email relationships, which are broadly representative of working relationships
  • We quantify connectivity within and between departments (and other segmentations)
  • Next, we look at networks of MS Teams activity, with comparable metrics
  • Within and between departments, we identify how many employees do not use MS Teams in their working relationships
  • By considering other networks (e.g., MS Teams memberships, instant messaging), we explore related factors, such as provisioning and confidence with chat-based tools

Your outcomes

  • An immediate set of baseline metrics for MS Teams
  • A detailed map of how MS Teams networks must evolve to achieve parity with email
  • Awareness of gaps in memberships and activity, enabling highly targeted interventions
  • A simple mechanism for tracking progress and demonstrating success over time

Sample illustrations

Read on to see some sample illustrations of our work in this area:

A graph visualisation of an organisation; edges denote MS Teams membership relationships, node colour denotes department

Common MS Team membership(s)

Fig. 1: In this visualisation of an organisation, node colour denotes department. Employees (the nodes) are connected if they share membership of one or more MS Teams (the edges). Thicker edges denote a greater number of common MS Teams. This network of relationships has two main clusters, and suggests a reasonably developed 'infrastructure' of MS Teams. However, membership does not guarantee usage.

A graph visualisation of an organisation; edges denote MS Teams posting relationships, node colour denotes department

Posting to common MS Team(s) (lowest count)Posting to common MS Team(s) (highest count)

Fig. 2: In this evolution of the previous visualisation, edges show relationships where employees have posted messages to one or more common MS Teams. Edge colour denotes the relative number of common MS Teams posted to, with yellow indicating the highest counts. Only a proportion of the MS Teams 'infrastructure' is used for chat-based collaboration. Whereas membership network includes c90% of employees, the posting network is approximately half that size.

A graph visualisation of an organisation; edges denote email relationships, node colour denotes department

Email relationship

Fig. 3: For comparison, this visualisation shows the network of email relationships between employees (the nodes). Node colour again denotes department. The email network is almost double the size of the MS Teams posting network, supporting the view that email is the dominant channel.

Fig. 4: This table shows, for each department (or pair of departments), the number of employees that have one or more email relationships with others in that population, but do not have any MS Teams posting relationships (in the same population). Within departments, D04, D09 and D11 offer the largest opportunities to migrate existing working relationships from email to MS Teams. For departmental pairings, the largest opportunities can be found in D04-D07, D04-D09 and D04-D11. These parts of the organisation should be priority targets for adoption support interventions.