Npm registry: Using other scope than organisation name

We have several repositories in an Organisation, named COMPANY (of course not, but we will use these names here).
Setting up the npm registry was no problem for the repository ‘helpers’. When using a package.json similar to this:

{
    "name": "@company/helpers",
    "version": "1.0.0",
    "repository": "git://github.com/COMPANY/helpers.git",
    "publishConfig": {
        "access": "restricted",
        "registry": "https://npm.pkg.github.com"
    }
}

everything worked as expected.

But now the requirements changed. We would like to use the companies name only for public packages hosted on npmjs.org, and use a different scope (say, cmp) for our internal libraries like this one, which will still be hosted on github registry.
But when changing the package.json to

{
    "name": "@cmp/helpers",
    "version": "1.0.0",
    "repository": "git://github.com/COMPANY/helpers.git",
    "publishConfig": {
        "access": "restricted",
        "registry": "https://npm.pkg.github.com"
    },
}

yarn publish aborts with the error message

Couldn’t publish package: “https://npm.pkg.github.com/@cmp%2Fhelpers: scope ‘cmp’ in package name ‘@cmp/helpers’ does not match repo owner ‘COMPANY’ in repository element in package.json”

What can we do? Creating a new Organisation seems like a possible solution, but is this really necessary? Is there no simpler solution?

Thanks for your help

Possible duplicate: Multiple scope support for Github NPM package management

That is indeed very similar, but unfortunately without a real solution. So is there no possibility to publish multiple scopes in a single organisation?

It seems to be an NPM policy as far as I can tell.

So what would be good workarounds?
Continue publishing the internal libraries with the scope and host them on GPR and publish public libraries without a scope on NPM? Or some different approach?
I would love to hear some common practices, as I’m not too familiar with the ecosystem yet.