The decision list that should exist before content moves
Migration tools are obedient. Whatever structure they are pointed at, they reproduce, and whatever ambiguity exists in the source arrives intact in the destination. That is why EPC Group refuses to schedule a SharePoint migration until five architecture decisions exist in writing. Microsoft defines information architecture as how content is organized and labeled and how visitors interact with it, and names six elements: global navigation, hub structure, local site and page navigation, metadata architecture, search experiences, and personalized content (Microsoft Learn, Introduction to SharePoint information architecture, accessed 2026-10-20). The five decisions below cover the first four of those elements plus the governance that keeps them true after go-live; search and personalization follow from them. EPC Group's SharePoint consulting practice runs the decisions as a short series of workshops with the business owners of each content area, not with IT alone.
Decision one: hubs and sites, or one site collection
Microsoft's guiding principle for modern SharePoint is that the world is flat. Classic architecture used site collections and subsites with inherited navigation and permissions; Microsoft now states that subsites are not recommended and that organizations should plan one site for each discrete topic, task or unit of work, connected through hubs, roll-up web parts and navigation links (Microsoft Learn, Introduction to SharePoint information architecture, accessed 2026-10-20). The reason is change: subsites are a physical construct reflected in the URL, so reorganizing the business breaks links, and policy features such as retention apply to the whole site collection whether wanted or not, whereas hubs model relationships as links that can be re-associated when the organization changes (Microsoft Learn, Planning your SharePoint hub sites, accessed 2026-10-20). EPC Group's default is one hub per division or major function, one site per team or project beneath it, and a communication site as the hub itself. Two limits shape the map: each site can belong to only one hub at a time (Microsoft Learn, Introduction to SharePoint information architecture, accessed 2026-10-20), and an organization is limited to 2,000 hub sites (Microsoft Learn, SharePoint limits, accessed 2026-10-20). A single site collection is the right answer only when the content truly is a single unit of work.
Decision two: how many libraries per site
The temptation after years on a file server is to recreate the share as one library with the same folder tree. The limits argue against it. Microsoft allows 2,000 lists and libraries combined per site collection, up to 30 million files and folders in a library, and 25 TB of storage per site, but once a list, library or folder holds more than 100,000 items its permission inheritance cannot be broken or re-inherited, and the recommended general limit for unique permissions in a list or library is 5,000 (Microsoft Learn, SharePoint limits, accessed 2026-10-20). EPC Group splits a library on three triggers only: a different audience that needs its own permissions, a different retention outcome, or a distinct set of metadata columns. A site that needs many libraries on those triggers is usually two or three sites wearing one name.
Decision three: folders, metadata, or both
Microsoft's guidance for content management is unambiguous: rely on metadata rather than folders to define a hierarchy of content, and declare site columns and content types at the root site of a site collection rather than lower down (Microsoft Learn, Enterprise Content Management, accessed 2026-10-20). Columns and content types are described as the two most important metadata elements for organizing documents and pages, helping users filter and sort within a library and helping search (Microsoft Learn, Introduction to SharePoint information architecture, accessed 2026-10-20). Folders still earn a place for two jobs: a permission boundary that must be visible to users, and a sync boundary, since Microsoft recommends syncing no more than 300,000 files in a single library (Microsoft Learn, SharePoint limits, accessed 2026-10-20). EPC Group's default is therefore shallow folders for those two jobs and metadata for everything else, with managed metadata used where a term must be consistent across sites; the term store supports 1,000 global term sets and 1 million total terms (same source).
Decision four: naming conventions and retention labels
Naming and retention are architecture because they are hard to retrofit. A Microsoft 365 Groups naming policy applies a prefix or suffix, built from fixed strings or user attributes such as department, and a custom blocked-words list, to the group name and alias across every group-creating workload including Outlook, Teams and SharePoint; it does not apply to Exchange distribution groups, and it requires that the organization possess, though not necessarily assign, a Microsoft Entra ID P1 license for each group member (Microsoft Learn, Microsoft 365 Groups and Microsoft Teams naming policy, accessed 2026-10-20). For retention, Microsoft distinguishes a retention policy, which applies the same settings to a whole site or mailbox, from a retention label, which applies at item level, travels with content moved within the tenant, can be set as a default label on a library, and can start its period from an event or mark content as a record (Microsoft Learn, Learn about retention policies and retention labels, accessed 2026-10-20). EPC Group fixes the site naming pattern, the group naming policy, and the label set before the first site is provisioned, so that migrated content lands already labeled.
Decision five: governance after go-live
Microsoft is explicit that information architecture is a continuous process: organizations, people and projects change, and what is learned about users allows adjustments that make content more discoverable (Microsoft Learn, Introduction to SharePoint information architecture, accessed 2026-10-20). Its recommended practice is to test navigation with real users performing tasks, release hubs in phases, review hub and site analytics regularly, and change navigation based on what the analytics and testing show (Microsoft Learn, Information architecture models and examples, accessed 2026-10-20). EPC Group's SharePoint governance practice turns that into three standing mechanisms: a provisioning request path that creates sites with the naming policy and label defaults already applied, a named hub owner who approves each new site association, and a quarterly review that finds sites with no owner, no activity or no hub. Confidential content gets its own site with external sharing turned off, which Microsoft recommends as the way to manage the risk of external access to sensitive information (Microsoft Learn, Sharing and permissions in the SharePoint modern experience, accessed 2026-10-20).
Documented work
ANON-CASES: EPC Group engagement data for pre-migration information architecture covers mid-size construction and legal organizations consolidating project and matter content into SharePoint Online, delivered by the firm's SharePoint consulting practice. Client names are not published here. Engagements are described by industry and organization size only, and no outcome figures are quoted that cannot be traced to a signed deliverable. EPC Group is a Microsoft Solutions Partner with all six Solutions Partner Designations as of October 2026.
Primary sources
- Introduction to SharePoint information architecture — Microsoft Learn, accessed 2026-10-20
- Planning your SharePoint hub sites — Microsoft Learn, accessed 2026-10-20
- SharePoint limits — Microsoft Learn, accessed 2026-10-20
- Enterprise Content Management — Microsoft Learn, accessed 2026-10-20
- Microsoft 365 Groups and Microsoft Teams naming policy — Microsoft Learn, accessed 2026-10-20
- Learn about retention policies and retention labels — Microsoft Learn, accessed 2026-10-20
- Sharing and permissions in the SharePoint modern experience — Microsoft Learn, accessed 2026-10-20
Frequently Asked Questions
Hub sites or a single site collection — how to decide?
Microsoft recommends against subsites in the modern experience and advises one site for each discrete topic, task or unit of work, connected by hubs rather than nested inside one site collection (Microsoft Learn, Introduction to SharePoint information architecture, accessed 2026-10-20). A single site collection is right only for a single unit of work. Everything larger becomes a family of sites joined by a hub, because hubs model relationships as links that can be changed, while subsites bake the hierarchy into the URL (Microsoft Learn, Planning your SharePoint hub sites, accessed 2026-10-20).
How many libraries per site and when to split?
A site collection supports 2,000 lists and libraries combined, a library can hold 30 million files and folders, and once a library or folder exceeds 100,000 items its permission inheritance can no longer be broken or re-inherited (Microsoft Learn, SharePoint limits, accessed 2026-10-20). EPC Group splits a library when its content needs a different permission set, a different retention outcome, or a different set of metadata columns; it does not split simply to mirror an old folder tree. A site that needs more than a handful of libraries usually needs to be more than one site.
Folders, metadata or both?
Microsoft's guidance for content management is to rely on metadata rather than folders to define a hierarchy of content, and to declare site columns and content types at the root of a site collection rather than in subsites (Microsoft Learn, Enterprise Content Management, accessed 2026-10-20). Columns and content types are described as the two most important metadata elements for organizing documents, helping users filter, sort and search (Microsoft Learn, Introduction to SharePoint information architecture, accessed 2026-10-20). EPC Group's default is shallow folders for permission or sync boundaries, metadata for everything else.
How do naming conventions and retention labels fit?
A Microsoft 365 Groups naming policy applies prefixes or suffixes, fixed strings or user attributes such as department, and blocks specified words across every group-creating workload including SharePoint and Teams (Microsoft Learn, Microsoft 365 Groups and Microsoft Teams naming policy, accessed 2026-10-20). Retention policies apply the same settings to a whole site, while retention labels apply at the item level and travel with content when it moves within the tenant (Microsoft Learn, Learn about retention policies and retention labels, accessed 2026-10-20). EPC Group fixes both before the first site is provisioned.
How is the architecture governed after go-live?
Microsoft describes information architecture as a continuous process and recommends testing designs with real users, reviewing hub and site analytics regularly, and adjusting navigation from what is learned (Microsoft Learn, Introduction to SharePoint information architecture, accessed 2026-10-20; Information architecture models and examples, accessed 2026-10-20). EPC Group adds a provisioning request path that applies the naming policy and label defaults, a quarterly review of hubs and orphaned sites, and a named owner for each hub who approves new site associations.
Talk to a senior architect
If your organization has a migration scheduled and no written architecture yet, a 30-minute discovery call with a senior EPC Group architect will walk through the five decisions and what each one needs from the business. See the SharePoint consulting service hub for engagement structures.
Email contact@epcgroup.net or call 888-381-9725.
a Microsoft Gold Partner (2000 until Microsoft retired the program in 2022) — today holding all six Microsoft Solutions Partner Designations.
Documented engagements
Each record publishes a redacted primary-source document — a client purchase order, executed agreement or payment record — with a SHA-256 hash you can recompute, and states what the document does not establish.
- Canadian Forces Morale & Welfare Services — ContractedCase study: CFMWS: SharePoint Consulting Support (2014)
- Federal Reserve Bank of New York — Contracted — countersignedCase study: New York Fed: SharePoint Center of Excellence (2010)
- National Institutes of Health — Work-product evidencedCase study: NIH: SharePoint Center of Excellence Design (2010)
- NASA Johnson Space Center — ContractedCase study: NASA: Agency SharePoint Center of Excellence (2009)Case study: NASA JSC: SharePoint Site Provisioning Solution (2009)
- Stryker — Delivered — payment-corroborated (client payment records published)Case study: Stryker: SharePoint Center of Excellence (2012)
- Novartis — Contracted — countersignedCase study: Novartis: SharePoint 2007 to 2010 Migration (2010-2011)
- Samsung Semiconductor — Contracted — countersignedCase study: Samsung Semiconductor: SharePoint Server 2019 Build (2021)
- Haskell — Contracted — countersignedCase study: Haskell: myHaskell Intranet on SharePoint Online (2019)
- PepsiCo — EPC-executed instrument + work productCase study: PepsiCo: MyPepsiCo Intranet Branding on SharePoint (2009)
- YMCA Houston — Work-product evidencedCase study: YMCA Houston: SharePoint Server 2007 Implementation (2007)
- Georgia Tech — ContractedCase study: Georgia Tech: Teams and SharePoint Advisory (2019)