『Step-by-Step Guide to Organizing Projects in Teams』のカバーアート

Step-by-Step Guide to Organizing Projects in Teams

Step-by-Step Guide to Organizing Projects in Teams

無料で聴く

ポッドキャストの詳細を見る

このコンテンツについて

 What’s the difference between a project that feels effortless and one that leaves everyone chasing files and status updates? It’s not the tool—it’s the system behind it. And most teams don’t realize they’re missing a few simple building blocks.Today, I’ll show you how to create an interconnected project structure in Microsoft Teams using SharePoint and Power Automate that makes project visibility automatic instead of manual—and why setting this up the right way from the start changes everything.Why Most Project Systems Collapse Within 90 DaysWhy do so many teams start strong but quickly slide back into chaos? The excitement at the beginning is real—you launch a fresh workspace, everyone agrees it’s going to be “the” organized project this time, and channels start filling with conversations. Tasks get dropped into planner boards, files make it into the right folder, and people actually post updates in threads instead of sending emails. For a short while, it feels like the team finally solved the coordination problem, like the right tool unlocked a better way of working. But that sense of order rarely lasts. Within a couple of months, the bright start fades, and suddenly you’re asking yourself why things look exactly like the last system that failed. The most common slide usually starts small. Maybe a single document that someone couldn’t find, so they dropped it into chat instead of uploading it. Or a new person joins the project and is confused about which channel or tab is current, so they create their own folder structure. Within weeks, the clean setup starts to sprout duplicates. The document library has ten different “final” versions, each hiding in different corners. Chat threads drift into mini project logs, while the supposed central tracker stops reflecting what the team is actually doing. Everyone has good intentions, but the snowball effect is real: unclear updates lead to side conversations, which lead to contradictory data, which eventually leads back to the exact confusion you thought you solved at the start. Sound familiar? Teams channels that were supposed to be focused workstreams turn into sprawling chatrooms that bury critical information. SharePoint libraries that were set up with neat categories end up buried under personal subfolders and one-off uploads. You go looking for a key file, and you’re faced with “copy of presentation (final 3).pptx” in multiple places, none of which you can be sure is the right one. The structure is still there in theory, but the day-to-day use of it doesn’t reflect that design anymore. Now, here’s the reality most teams don’t want to admit: the collapse isn’t because you didn’t pick the right app. It’s not that Teams is missing a magic feature or that SharePoint isn’t intuitive enough. Research into project management failures consistently shows the bigger issue is system design, not tool choice. Tools only enforce behavior if there’s a system that guides how they will be used as a whole. Without it, every project becomes another round of learning the same lessons through trial, error, and frustration. There’s a difference between short-term habits and long-term structure. Starting strong often relies on habits—people remember to upload files, they check the planner board, they reply in the right channel. But habits fade under pressure. Once deadlines heat up or the team scales past the original group, people fall back into the fastest way of working—even if that means clutter, duplication, and confusion. Short-term habits keep you disciplined only as long as energy is high. Structure, however, doesn’t depend on people remembering. A well-designed structure makes the right action easier than the shortcut, so discipline doesn’t have to be a daily choice. And what’s the hidden cost when there isn’t structure? Hours vanish into searching for documents that should’ve been centralized. Tasks are logged twice in separate trackers, which means work gets repeated or handoffs are missed. Updates come late, or worse, they contradict each other, so leaders make decisions based on outdated information. Over time, the cost adds up not only in wasted effort but in slower progress, higher stress, and lower trust across the team. Everyone feels like they’re working hard—because they are—but the actual system multiplies inefficiency instead of eliminating it. So why do some teams manage to keep their systems running smoothly while most collapse in under three months? The answer is that they don’t treat the tool itself as the fix. They don’t assume “new channel equals new workflow.” They design principles first. Principles give a framework that shapes how the team uses the tool, rather than leaving it as a blank canvas that slowly falls apart. Without principles, the tool is just a series of folders, chat windows, and dashboards waiting to be misused. With them, even if tools evolve or ...
まだレビューはありません