Upgrade a team to advance and the rest to Starter

[Taabish_Khalani]

Just to clarify our use case:

We will have multiple teams in the organization (HR, Marketing, etc.), and each team will manage their own projects.

Our PMO team (a small group of users) would like to use the Portfolio feature to create cross-team portfolios that include projects from these different teams.

In this scenario:

The PMO team would have the Advanced plan

Other teams (HR, Marketing, etc.) would remain on the Starter plan

PMO users would add projects from those teams into portfolios for reporting and visibility

Would the Divisions functionality support this setup? and how?

Specifically, can PMO users within a Division on the Advanced plan create portfolios that include projects owned by teams who are not part of that Division and do not have Advanced licenses?

Any guidance on how this should be structured in Asana would be appreciated.

Thank you.

[Bhumika_Bihani]

Hi @Taabish_Khalani
Divisions would not support this setup in the way you described

In Asana Divisions, Advanced features (like Portfolios) are available only within that Division. This means:

• Projects included in a Portfolio must belong to the same Division where the Advanced plan is applied.

• If HR and Marketing teams are outside the PMO Division (on Starter), their projects cannot be added to a Portfolio created in the Advanced Division.

• Divisions essentially separate feature access and administration boundaries.

[lpb]

Welcome, @Taabish_Khalani,

My understanding of the update to Divisions in 2026 is that this is possible, so long as 1) the PMO users are given access to the projects of interest, and 2) PMO users create the portfolio (for their use; it won’t be accessible to Starter Divisions).

Thus, I’ve unmarked the other post here as a solution for now.

See @Arthur_BEGOU’s great post, and the Asana links therein, for more info:

What we learned about Divisions, again (A 2026 guide to the new model)

Hi all In 2021, the Asana community post from @Julien_RENAUD “What I learned about Divisions” became the go to reference for anyone trying to understand this “sometimes confusing” concept. But recently, Asana’s Divisions model has evolved significantly, so it is now worth updating our knowledge of that model around structure, licensing and admin controls. [image] A change for the better The biggest win for Asana customers is this: cross Division collaboration no longer forces …

@Elluz_Macalinao and @Arthur_BEGOU, could you confirm?

Thanks,

Larry

[Arthur_BEGOU]

Thanks @lpb

Indeed, since 2025, the concept of Divisions has slightly evolved and this is the new guide: What we learned about Divisions, again (A 2026 guide to the new model)

Your use-case is completely compatible. A project doesn’t “belong” to a division. The project is simply shared with users who can belong to different divisions. Each of them could see the same data, but limited by the features they are paying for, according to their plan.
Division is now only a concept of seat allocation (licenses), not data separation anymore. Cross Division collaboration is easier than before.

Also, important for you:

@Arthur_BEGOU

What happens if a user in an Advanced Division invites me to their project while I’m in a Starter Division?

You keep your Starter license.

In your case, PMO portfolio admin (or editor) can add the Starter Divsion project to the porfolio.
However, the Starter users won’t be able to access the portfolio, as they don’t benefit from that feature in their plan.

Also, have in mind that sharing a portfolio is only giving access to the shell (the container), the projects within the portfolio should also be shared to the users (or the teams) who should see them. But there is an option in the portfolio sharing panel to also give access to the project(s), when you invite users to the portfolio (as soon as you are admin a project); if not, you can always invite the users or teams manually on each project concerned.

Hope that was clear,
Let me know if you have more questions

[lpb]

Thanks, @Arthur_BEGOU, for all the added details.

@lpb

@Arthur_BEGOU, could you confirm?

Since you didn’t indicate either way, would you say that my post above is a correct and complete short-form answer? Just trying to clarify that we’re conveying the same underlying info, just much more whys and extras in your reply, right? I believe that’s the case, but want to be sure.

Thanks,

Larry

[Arthur_BEGOU]

Hey @lpb

Your post is 100% right; and I’m actually marking as solution, as your answer is nicely summarized.

(I know perfectly your comment wasn’t about claiming solution )

[lpb]

We’re in violent agreement!

Except over the solution checkmark–I restored yours because the answer is more thorough and useful. Thanks for this!