Deal of The Day! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions
Mail Us support@pass4success.com
Location US
Mob_nav_barsMENU

Salesforce Exam Development Lifecycle and Deployment Architect Topic 2 Question 35 Discussion

Actual exam question for Salesforce's Development Lifecycle and Deployment Architect exam
Question #: 35
Topic #: 2
[All Development Lifecycle and Deployment Architect Questions]

Universal Containers (UC) has been using Salesforce Sales Cloud for many years

following a highly customized, single-org strategy with great success so far.

What two reasons can justify a change to a multi-org strategy?

Choose 2 answers

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: A, D

by Truman at Apr 28, 2024, 03:49 PM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium Development Lifecycle and Deployment Architect Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

Submit Cancel
Yoko
8 months ago
Haha, I bet the person who wrote C has never actually worked with Salesforce. 'Unification enterprise architecture'? What is this, a university exam question?
upvoted 0 times
Clorinda
8 months ago
B) UC wants to use Chatter for collaboration among different business units and stop working in silos.
upvoted 0 times
...
Toi
8 months ago
A) UC is launching a new line of business with independent processes and adding any new feature to it is too complex.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Shalon
9 months ago
I'm not sure B is a good reason to move to a multi-org strategy. Chatter can be used across orgs just fine. D is definitely a valid reason though.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lynelle
9 months ago
A and D seem like the most reasonable options here. Separate orgs for different business units and acquired companies just makes sense to me.
upvoted 0 times
Thora
8 months ago
Separate orgs for different business units and acquired companies just makes sense to me.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jaime
8 months ago
A and D seem like the most reasonable options here.
upvoted 0 times
...
Dana
8 months ago
It would definitely help in maintaining independent processes and regulatory requirements.
upvoted 0 times
...
Tatum
8 months ago
Having separate orgs for different business units and acquired companies just makes sense.
upvoted 0 times
...
Tiffiny
8 months ago
A and D seem like the most reasonable options here.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lilli
8 months ago
Separate orgs for different business units and acquired companies just makes sense to me.
upvoted 0 times
...
Refugia
8 months ago
A and D seem like the most reasonable options here.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Salina
9 months ago
So A) and D) seem most compelling. Separate processes and regulatory requirements make it clear.
upvoted 0 times
...
Oretha
10 months ago
Hmm, I don't think it's strong enough to justify a change to multi-org just for Chatter.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lezlie
10 months ago
What about B)? Chatter collaboration among units?
upvoted 0 times
...
Salina
10 months ago
Totally agree. Plus D) seems valid too. An acquired company with different regulations could justify a separate org.
upvoted 0 times
...
Alisha
10 months ago
Yeah, I think A) makes sense. Launching a new line of business with different processes could be too complex in a single org.
upvoted 0 times
...
Oretha
10 months ago
Hey, did you find any good reasons for UC to switch to a multi-org strategy?
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel