SAP Certified - SAP SuccessFactors Employee Central Core and Position Management (C_THR81_2605) 認定 C_THR81_2605 試験問題:

1. In a public cloud SAP SuccessFactors Employee Central Core and Position Management project, a consultant is validating a workflow for position-linked temporary transfers. In the web-based environment, requests created for one business area start correctly but route to a fallback reviewer instead of the intended delegated approver when the primary approver is unavailable.
The same delegation behavior works for other business areas. The customer confirms that delegated approvers were maintained centrally and wants the routing fixed without duplicating workflows by business area, because long-term maintenance must stay simple. The issue began after the affected business area was added to the transfer design during the latest configuration cycle.
What should the consultant investigate first?
Response:

A) Create a separate workflow for the affected business area so the delegated approver can be assigned directly without shared logic.
B) Add the delegated approver to the fallback reviewer group so routed requests still reach someone who can approve them.
C) Instruct users in the affected business area to wait until the primary approver returns rather than using delegated routing.
D) Review the rule or approver-determination condition for the newly added business area, then correct the logic that should resolve the delegated approver instead of the fallback reviewer.

2. In a public cloud SAP SuccessFactors Employee Central tenant, a consultant is validating employee transfers between organizational units after a recent corporate data maintenance cycle. In the web-based UI, the transfer action opens normally, but for one set of regions the target department list is incomplete even though the departments exist in the system. Users can complete transfers in other regions without issue.
HR administrators confirm that the missing departments were introduced during the latest corporate structure update and should be available only within specific organizational combinations. The customer wants the consultant to restore accurate selection behavior without weakening organizational controls or exposing departments outside their intended scope.
What is the best next step?
Response:

A) Review the corporate data relationships and effective configuration for the new departments, then correct the organizational associations that govern their availability in transfers.
B) Export the department records, create duplicate department entries for the affected regions, and use those duplicates in transfer processing.
C) Grant all transfer users broader visibility to all departments so the missing entries appear immediately during the move process.
D) Ask HR administrators to complete transfers using a temporary generic department and correct the final department later by direct edit.

3. <strong>CHALLENGE 4 &#x2014; Employee Data Workflow for Compliance Review</strong> A tester suggests changing workflow routing so insurance employee changes always go directly to a compliance reviewer, regardless of employee and position context. This would reduce pending corporate HR items before the regulated review.
Why is this approach less appropriate?
Response:

A) It changes routing before confirming whether employee context and position assignment already determine the correct reviewer.
B) It prevents HR partners from updating branch employee records.
C) It is less appropriate because corporate HR must always approve insurance employee changes.
D) It is less appropriate because compliance reviewers cannot approve any Employee Central workflow tasks.

4. In a public cloud SAP SuccessFactors Employee Central and Position Management tenant, a consultant is validating a temporary position suspension process before a quarterly workforce review. In the web-based UI, HR specialists can set selected positions to a suspended status and save successfully. The new status is visible on the position record, but for a subset of suspended positions the expected restriction on downstream assignment actions does not apply, and users can still initiate follow-on staffing activity.
Earlier positions in the tenant behave correctly. The customer confirms the affected positions were all created under a newly introduced position group used for seasonal roles and wants to keep that design because planning reports depend on it. The consultant must correct the issue without requiring manual monitoring of every suspended position.
What is the best first action?
Response:

A) Ask HR specialists to review suspended seasonal positions manually and reverse any downstream assignment actions that occur before the workforce review.
B) Give staffing users additional guidance not to initiate follow-on activity for suspended seasonal positions even if the action remains available.
C) Recreate the affected positions under an older position group so the existing suspension behavior applies again.
D) Review the dependency between the new position group and suspension-state enforcement, then correct the configuration controlling downstream action restrictions after save.

5. <strong>CHALLENGE 2 &#x2014; Shared Banquet Position Context for Event Staffing</strong> A banquet assignment can be saved, but manager-facing review later displays inconsistent resort context. The guest services director asks whether the team can proceed if HR coordination verifies banquet assignments outside the system.
Which response best reflects the performance-versus-governance trade-off?
Response:

A) Open all banquet positions to resort operations managers temporarily so they can confirm assignments faster during validation.
B) Proceed with offline HR verification because it preserves the remediation schedule and the assignment record saves successfully.
C) Narrow the validation set and verify representative banquet assignments in the system before relying on offline confirmation.
D) Stop all housekeeping and banquet testing until every position record across all resorts is rebuilt.

質問と回答：