Clarification on Nested Azure Management Groups and Parent Limitations

Question

The Azure documentation states that management groups can be nested, but it also mentions that each management group and subscription can support only one parent. Can anyone explain what this means in practical terms?

This question is related to the following Learning Module

Answer 1

In practical terms, the Azure documentation's statement about management groups and subscriptions having only one parent but allowing nested management groups can be understood as follows:

Key Concepts:

1. Single Parent Rule:
   • Each management group or subscription can be part of only one parent management group. This ensures a clear and hierarchical structure within your Azure environment.
2. Nested Management Groups:
   • You can create a hierarchy by nesting management groups within one another. For example, a management group can have child management groups, and those child groups can have their own children, forming a tree-like structure.

What This Looks Like in Practice:

• Example Hierarchy:

    Root Management Group
    ├── Finance Management Group
    │   ├── Subscriptions (e.g., Sub1, Sub2)
    │   └── Child Management Group (e.g., Finance-Dev)
    └── IT Management Group
        ├── Subscriptions (e.g., Sub3, Sub4)
        └── Child Management Group (e.g., IT-Prod)
  

  • The Root Management Group is the top-level group (provided by default in every Azure tenant).
  • Nested groups allow you to logically organize and group resources (subscriptions and management groups) under higher-level categories like "Finance" or "IT."
  • Each child management group or subscription belongs to exactly one parent management group. For example, Finance-Dev belongs to the Finance management group and cannot belong to both Finance and IT.

Implications:

1. Clear Ownership and Policies:
   • The single-parent rule ensures that policies, access control, and governance rules are inherited in a predictable manner.
   • For instance, a policy applied to the Finance management group automatically cascades to its children (Finance-Dev, Sub1, Sub2).
2. No Overlapping Structures:
   • Since each management group or subscription can have only one parent, overlapping hierarchies or ambiguous relationships are avoided.
3. Flexible Nesting:
   • You can create a deep hierarchy to match your organizational structure or governance requirements. For example, you might have:

          Root Management Group
          ├── Region A
          │   ├── Business Unit 1
          │   │   ├── Subscription 1
          │   │   └── Subscription 2
          │   └── Business Unit 2
          └── Region B
              ├── Business Unit 3
              └── Subscription 3
     

Benefits:

• Simplified Management: Nested structures make it easier to manage and apply policies at various organizational levels.
• Granular Control: Policies and access permissions can be scoped appropriately at each level of the hierarchy.

---

If the above response helps answer your question, remember to "Accept Answer" so that others in the community facing similar issues can easily find the solution. Your contribution is highly appreciated.

hth

Marcin