How can we improve Planner?

Instead of 1 to 1, allow Groups to have many Plans

Right now, groups have a 1 to 1 relationship (1 Group = 1 Plan), would be nice for a single group to have multiple plans

1,402 votes
Sign in
Check!
(thinking…)
Reset
or sign in with
  • facebook
  • google
    Password icon
    I agree to the terms of service
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Brent EllisBrent Ellis shared this idea  ·   ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    40 comments

    Sign in
    Check!
    (thinking…)
    Reset
    or sign in with
    • facebook
    • google
      Password icon
      I agree to the terms of service
      Signed in as (Sign out)
      Submitting...
      • Anonymous commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        We are one team and have five Trello Boards (one for each of our projects). This is a blocker for our enterprise and will be sticking with Trello until Planner adds this functionality.

      • andrew marshandrew marsh commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Teams creates a plan per channel, those channel plans need to have a way to be consunmed in Planner (just need a sub menu under each group on th eleft hand side in planner to access the channel plans if they are created in teams)

      • LuboLubo commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        This is needed for many people. As we use daily groups teams and planner we need create more plans for one group thanks for any help

      • Purple ManPurple Man commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        We found that within a Office 365 Group each Teams Channel can have its own plan. This means that it is possible to have multiple plans per team. Just go ahead and create a new channel in Teams and then add a new planner tab. This allows you to create a new plan. Please note that this plan does not show up in de web interface of Planner under the Planner Hub, but you can access the plan through the web interface by using the link in Teams.

      • Randy MandelRandy Mandel commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        We have been getting around this by creating a new bucket for each new project that a single team covers but this is getting tedious. It would be much better to be able to associate a single team to multiple projects. Along with this, I would like to see my group's activity across multiple projects. It is hard to see what their workload looks like when I have to go into multiple plans to see that. A manager view that gives me the same view across multiple plans that each of my team members have for their own work would be great.

      • Anonymous commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Great idea. I posted something similar. One team that has a recurring project each quarter. I want unique project names but not a new team each time.

      • Anonymous commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Please let groups die. It is overly confusing people and is not useful at all. Groups absolutely sucks. Teams and Yammer are the way to go. It is time for Sharepoint to be phased out.

      • Anonymous commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        This is very crucial! We have about 600 Project each year, cannot have 600 Groups... Many thanks!

      • Phil HawkshawPhil Hawkshaw commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        This is critical. Groups are very team driven but Plans in planner are very process or subject driven. Multiple Plans per group is essential otherwise we end up with lots of groups with docs spread all over the place for a single team. Also tasks often need moving between plans in a Group (team). This approach would also work better for the Teams application too which is focused around Groups too.

        Simple solution: Have a folder per Plan in the Group. Have a folder per bucket in the Plan folder. Solves the horrible flat folder structure improsed on Groups by Planner as well as the multi planner board in a Group issue too.

      • BjörnBjörn commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        I like the idea, that I get a new group for every plan. But I agree, a group should be able to have more plans.
        So what about "Master-Groups" and "Sub-Groups"?

      • @DavidMcKnight@DavidMcKnight commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        With Microsoft Teams implementation of Planner, they are almost there. You can create many channels for a Team. Each team is attached to a group. Each channel can have its own plan. Unfortunately, if you have an existing plan with that group it is not available through Teams -- and the Teams implementation of Planner is sort of a Planner Lite with fewer features, which I find very frustrating. Also, you can't currently view these additional plans inside the Planner Hub; only within Teams. Still a long way to go to make this functional.

      • c bc b commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Yes.. And not only that, we should not be forced to create a whole Group (and email) if we create a "Plan".

      • MichaelMichael commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Here are my ideas how to implement it:

        If you create the first planner, it is the main Planner which is on the same relationship with the group. The second planner is a sub planner. By creating a second planner, all tasks from main planner must be transferred to an other sub planner. So that you have 3 Planners if you created 2 Planners. The main Planner should now show an overview of all sub planner. That would be the perfect solution. It is the first thing, a manager will ask for, after seeing Planner.

      • RobertRobert commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        I would also like to request that while you are evaluating this idea that you allow for some kind of forced naming convention on the self-serviced planner/group names. A prefix would be nice. Otherwise this will make a mess of our AD.

      • Anonymous commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        My Customers are getting confused because of the huge number of Groups generated. They work in teams and would like to have a Group for a Team and then manage the several Projects/Plan in one group. Each group handles 150 Project an Year and creating 150 user groups it's really a mess making Planner unfortunately useless. We love O365 but...

      • Bart LamotBart Lamot commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        I now have made a Plan just with each subplan as a card, and then added a link to the actual plan per subproject... But subplans would be great to overview a department with plans

      • AbhitalksAbhitalks commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Its been 6 months since the request, and nearly 3 months since the team started thinking about it. Are you guys still thinking? Or the thinking phase is over and implementation is underway? We need some update here. To start with relationship with a group shouldn't have been mandatory in the first place. If not, at least multiple plans per group is really required. For us, it is a no go and a deal breaker for our users for just this reason. Not to mention dealing with the mess of arbitrary huge number of groups! Now that Yammer and SharePoint team sites are going to be associated with O365 Groups, this is giving us nightmares already!!!

      ← Previous 1

      Feedback and Knowledge Base