Every category where a model named Microsoft Teams for a mid-market B2B company. Share is first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts; rank is within every product named in that category.

Category	Function	Share	Rank	Negative rate	Labels	Quadrant	Since September 2026
Internal communications and intranet	Onboarding and employee experience	14%	1 of 86	21%	14	accepted challenger	▼−2Since September 2026: 16% → 14%, −2 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
Video interviewing	Talent acquisition	0%	46 of 66	33%	6	under 10 labels · led by Spark Hire at 50%	=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
Internal talent marketplace	Performance and talent management	0%	26 of 102	0%	2	under 10 labels · led by Fuel50 at 47%	=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
Employee engagement surveys	Onboarding and employee experience	0%	49 of 58	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by Culture Amp at 37%	=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
Recognition and rewards	Onboarding and employee experience	0%	38 of 98	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by Bonusly at 29%	newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now.
Whistleblowing and investigations	Core HR and payroll	0%	94 of 107	100%	1	under 10 labels · led by FaceUp at 25%

Movement

Since September 2026, Microsoft Teams held within the floor in all six categories: no change cleared 13 points.

Best category · Internal communications · by segment

Small business=heldSince September 2026: 2% → 2%, ±0 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.

2%from 2% in September 2026

Inside the floor by 13 pointsRank 12 of 83, unchanged

Mid-market▼−2Since September 2026: 16% → 14%, −2 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.

14%from 16% in September 2026

Inside the floor by 11 pointsRank 2 → 1 of 83

Enterprise▼−1Since September 2026: 10% → 8%, −1 point. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.

8%from 10% in September 2026

Inside the floor by 12 pointsRank 4 of 87, unchanged

All categories · Mid-market

Category	September 2026	Now	Change	Reading	Rank
Internal communications	16%	14%	▼−2Since September 2026: 16% → 14%, −2 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.	Within noise	Rank 2 → 1 of 86
Video interviewing	0%	0%	=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.	Within noise	Rank 16 → 46 of 66
Internal talent marketpl	0%	0%	=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.	Within noise	Rank 55 → 26 of 102
Employee engagement surv	0%	0%	=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.	Within noise	Rank 58 → 49 of 58
Recognition and rewards	0%	0%	newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now.	New this edition	Rank 38 of 98, unchanged
Whistleblowing	0%	0%	newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now.	New this edition	Rank 94 of 107, unchanged

Shares here are read over the models both editions asked, so they can differ by a point or two from the standing above, which counts every model in this edition.

The floor is 13 points of share, measured: how far the models move a leader on their own when the same questions are asked twice with nothing changed. A larger change is movement; a smaller one is noise, and both are shown. Movement is read over the twelve models both editions asked; GPT-6 Luna, Muse Glimmer 30B joined this edition and are in the standing but not yet in the comparison. How the floor is measured · The editions

By model

How each model treated Microsoft Teams across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.

ShowHide

Model	First choice	Alternative	Mention	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	1	0	1
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	1	1	1	1	4
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	0	2	2
Grok 4.1 Fast	1	0	1	0	2
Mistral Small	0	0	0	1	1
DeepSeek V4 Flash	1	1	0	0	2
Llama 4 Maverick	1	0	0	0	1
Qwen 3.7 Flash	1	1	2	0	4
Kimi K2	1	0	0	1	2
GLM 4.7 FlashX	1	0	0	0	1
MiniMax M2.5	0	1	1	0	2
GPT-6 Luna	1	0	0	0	1
Muse Glimmer 30B	0	1	0	1	2

By framing

Which of the six questions produced the naming. By model says how often; this says asked what. The first-choice count on the right carries the marks of the models that produced it.

FramingLabels by classFirst choices

Direct4 labelsNone

Paraphrase31 labels13

Comparative7 labelsNone

Budget-constrained14 labels2

Scale-constrained3 labelsNone

Negative19 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative78 labels in all, every segment counted; 15 of the 15 first choices count toward share, since the comparative and negative framings do not. The bar is one segment per label class, to scale within the framing.

What the models said for it

Verbatim evidence the judge attached to positive labels.

“Use Microsoft Teams (if you are on M365) or Slack (if you are on Google/Hybrid) for your day-to-day, fast-paced communication.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Internal communications · paraphrase prompt · first choice

“My default recommendation: Microsoft Teams + SharePoint, if your company already uses Microsoft 365.” GPT-6 Luna · Internal communications · paraphrase prompt · first choice

“The Safe Bet: Microsoft Teams ... has become the default choice over the last few years.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Internal communications · paraphrase prompt · first choice

“I'd recommend Microsoft Teams as the top choice for most scenarios” Grok 4.1 Fast · Internal communications · paraphrase prompt · first choice

And against it

Verbatim evidence attached to negative labels. A warning on a product with few labels is a warning; on a product with many, it is one voice among them.

“daily communication tools like Slack, Microsoft Teams, Outlook, or Google Workspace, do not use them for sensitive disclosures” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Whistleblowing · negative prompt · hard negative

“Modern SaaS platforms create ecosystems where each tool works best with the others, creating integration dependencies that are expensive to replicate elsewhere: Outlook + Teams + SharePoint + OneDrive.” Muse Glimmer 30B · Internal communications · negative prompt · soft negative

“such as Zoom, Google Meet, Teams, or Skype... these tools lack recruitment-specific features and can still introduce bias through inconsistent use” Perplexity Sonar · Video interviewing · negative prompt · soft negative

“Standalone communication tools such as Slack, Teams, or newsletter-only systems if you are using them as the intranet itself” Perplexity Sonar · Internal communications · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Microsoft Teams, over the 78 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Microsoft Teams was named but was not.

ShowHide

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Slack45 of 7813Compare →

Workvivo15 of 781Compare →

Zoom15 of 780Not among the top eight

Notion14 of 781Not among the top eight

Microsoft SharePoint13 of 781Compare →

Staffbase11 of 783Not among the top eight

Google Meet10 of 780Not among the top eight

Spark Hire9 of 781Not among the top eight

Simpplr9 of 780Compare →

HireVue8 of 782Not among the top eight

A head-to-head page exists where both products are among a category's top eight. The other rows are the same fact without a page behind them, so they link to the product instead.

What carried it into the answer

The sites and pages cited by the answers that named Microsoft Teams. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.

Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, five of the fourteen in this edition, so these counts come from 65 of the 78 answers that named Microsoft Teams and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

g2.com24

workvivo.com21

peoplemanagingpeople.com20

learn.g2.com19

selectsoftwarereviews.com17

agilityportal.io15

slack.com15

guideflow.com14

firsthr.app13

mailmodo.com13

171 of the 171 domain citations in answers naming Microsoft Teams came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

mailmodo.com/marketing-stash/internal-communications-software13

learn.g2.com/best-employee-intranet-software8

selectsoftwarereviews.com/buyer-guide/internal-communication-tools8

atlassian.com/blog/loom/internal-communications-tools7

g2.com/categories/internal-communications7

hiretruffle.com/blog/video-interviewing-solutions7

nextiva.com/blog/business-communication-app.html7

softwareadvice.co.uk/directory/4572/internal-communications/software7

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Search and answers

Where Microsoft Teams stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.

ShowHide

In search

Google, US estimates

Position for “employee intranet”

–

not in the top ten

Position for “intranet platforms”

–

not in the top ten

Searches for its name, Google: 673,000 a month (“microsoft teams”)
AI search demand for its name, est.: 16,550 a month
Organic visits to its site: about 145,358,109 a month
Searches its site ranks for: 2,421,769 · 793,520 in the top three
Sites linking to it: 2,904,433
Paid Google search: 56 searches its ads show for, about 705 clicks and $12,455 a month (estimate)

Ads on GoogleDetailLess

103+ ads · 93 text, 8 video, 2 image · 103 shown in the last 30 days

First shown August 2022, as Microsoft Corporation, verified. Ads started 2025-10 to 2026-09: 26 in the year, 77 before. 17 more by other advertisers linking to it.

On Google's pages: 1 2 3 4

In answers

This edition

Share of first choices

14%

rank 1 of 86 in internal communications

First choices

across its categories

Named in: 78 answers
Its own site cited: in 65 of the answers that named it

Search figures are US estimates from DataForSEO, read September 28, 2026; AI search demand is its modeled, directional estimate, not a count of queries to any assistant. The answers are this edition's. Two measurements side by side: neither is read as the cause of the other.

What it publishes

ShowHide

Addresses on microsoft.com

10,448

subdomains included

Content

146

counted in the table below

Documentation

Product · Integration

1,142 · 20

Kind	Pages	Last 90 days	Latest
Glossary or explainer	44	undated
Comparison	30	undated
News or press	27	10	2026-09-28
Blog	25	4	2026-09-24
Case study	12	undated
Conference or event	5	undated
Template or tool	2	undated
Report or ebook	1	0	2025-12-02

Most recent

2026-09-28At nasa ai is helping scientists unlock discoveries hidden in decades of data news or press
2026-09-24Rockwell automation pairs ai with decades of shop floor know how so workers can solve glitches faster news or press
2026-09-24Run assert eval responsible ai agent risk discovery at runtime blog
2026-09-23On the issues blog
2026-09-22When disaster strikes ai helps responders reach people more quickly news or press
2026-09-21Microsoft datacenter academy helps launch tech careers news or press

How it is countedHide how it is counted

Every page microsoft.com exposes, subdomains included. Kind is read from the address and title. The last 90 days, the latest date and the twelve months count pages by when they were published, from the site's feeds, a date in the address, or the page's own publication date, read from up to a hundred of its most recently changed pages; a page that says only when it last changed is counted in its kind but not in when, so the recent counts are a floor, and a kind none of whose pages gives a publication date reads undated. An event counts as online when its address or title says so (webinar, on demand, virtual or online summit); a conference, summit, trade show, expo or roadshow that does not say so is counted as a conference or event, which on a vendor's site is mostly in person. Read September 29, 2026.

Names read as Microsoft Teams

What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Microsoft Teams; a claim can dispute any of them.

Teams 2MS Teams 1Microsoft 1Microsoft SharePoint/Teams 1Microsoft Teams Free 1Microsoft Teams/SharePoint 1

Follow Microsoft Teams

An email the morning each edition publishes: where this product moved, where it held, and by how much against the noise floor. One address, confirmed by a click; a stop link in every email.

Already following? Everything you follow, with a stop for each.

The company

Microsoft Teams is its own company.

ShowHide

In its own words

Stated by the vendor, not checked

Positioning: Grow your business with Microsoft Teams
microsoft.com
For: business
microsoft.com
Free plan or trial: Vyzkoušet zdarma microsoft.com/cs-cz/dynamics-365/pricing-overview
Not stated on the pages read: Price, starting price, integrations, certifications, hosting, customers

What Microsoft Teams's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: microsoft.com, microsoft.com/cs-cz/dynamics-365/pricing-overview, trust.microsoft.com, microsoft.com/cs-cz/dynamics-365/solutions/ai, microsoft.com/cs-cz/isv/marketplace. A claimed page can correct any of them.

Is this your product?

Claim this page

Claiming is free and changes nothing in the data. A claimed page shows a verified contact who is told when each edition publishes and when Microsoft Teams's standing changes by more than the noise floor; the right to propose corrections to the vendor table, meaning names the judge wrote that should or should not read as Microsoft Teams, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.

What a new claim receivesHide what a new claim receives

A new claim receives the current edition's vendor brief for Microsoft Teams by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:

where Microsoft Teams is named, by buyer and by framing, and which cells hold its first choices;
the claims the models make when they name it, ranked, with the strongest and the weakest quoted;
its vocabulary against the segment leader's, and the pages the models cited;
who was chosen in the answers that did not name Microsoft Teams, and every reason the record gives;
a battlecard for each top rival: the head-to-head split, why they win, and the reservation quoted against them;
one page of published figures cleared to show a buyer.

Badges

Wins only: a badge exists where Microsoft Teams is ranked in a category's top three this edition. Three sizes, one file each, light and dark; the code is under each.

ShowHide

AI models recommend Microsoft Teams first in Internal communications and intranet this edition. Each badge says so in the buyer's words, names the edition, and links to the standing. The next edition issues a new badge; this one stays true as a record of October 2026.

Wide · 320 × 104 Website, beside other badges

Show the code

<a href="https://hr-ai-index.com/experience/internal-communications-and-intranet/"><img src="https://hr-ai-index.com/badges/2026-10/microsoft-teams--internal-communications-and-intranet-wide.svg" alt="AI models' first choice in Internal communications and intranet, October 2026 Edition, HR AI Recommendation Index" width="320" height="104"></a>

Copy the code as it is. The link is part of the badge: it points at the Internal communications and intranet standing, where the claim can be checked.

Square · 240 × 240 LinkedIn, slides

Show the code

<a href="https://hr-ai-index.com/experience/internal-communications-and-intranet/"><img src="https://hr-ai-index.com/badges/2026-10/microsoft-teams--internal-communications-and-intranet-square.svg" alt="AI models' first choice in Internal communications and intranet, October 2026 Edition, HR AI Recommendation Index" width="240" height="240"></a>

Copy the code as it is. The link is part of the badge: it points at the Internal communications and intranet standing, where the claim can be checked.

Compact · 200 × 56 Email signature, footer

Show the code

<a href="https://hr-ai-index.com/experience/internal-communications-and-intranet/"><img src="https://hr-ai-index.com/badges/2026-10/microsoft-teams--internal-communications-and-intranet-compact.svg" alt="AI models' first choice in Internal communications and intranet, October 2026 Edition, HR AI Recommendation Index" width="200" height="56"></a>

Copy the code as it is. The link is part of the badge: it points at the Internal communications and intranet standing, where the claim can be checked.

Badges read on light and dark pages. Alt text carries the claim, the category, the edition and the index, so it stays a citation where the image does not load.