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

AUC is launching a new line of business with independent processes and adding any new
feature to it is too complex.

BUC wants to use Chatter for collaboration among different business units and stop
working in silos.

CUC follows a unification enterprise architecture operating model by having orgs with the
same processes implemented for each business unit.

DAcquired company that has its own Salesforce org and operates in a different business
with its own set of regulatory requirements.

Show Suggested 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

6 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

6 months ago

B) UC wants to use Chatter for collaboration among different business units and stop working in silos.

upvoted 0 times

...

Toi

6 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

6 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

6 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

5 months ago

Separate orgs for different business units and acquired companies just makes sense to me.

upvoted 0 times

...

Jaime

5 months ago

A and D seem like the most reasonable options here.

upvoted 0 times

...

Dana

5 months ago

It would definitely help in maintaining independent processes and regulatory requirements.

upvoted 0 times

...

Tatum

5 months ago

Having separate orgs for different business units and acquired companies just makes sense.

upvoted 0 times

...

Tiffiny

5 months ago

A and D seem like the most reasonable options here.

upvoted 0 times

...

Lilli

6 months ago

Separate orgs for different business units and acquired companies just makes sense to me.

upvoted 0 times

...

Refugia

6 months ago

A and D seem like the most reasonable options here.

upvoted 0 times

...

Salina

7 months ago

So A) and D) seem most compelling. Separate processes and regulatory requirements make it clear.

upvoted 0 times

...

Oretha

7 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

7 months ago

What about B)? Chatter collaboration among units?

upvoted 0 times

...

Salina

7 months ago

Totally agree. Plus D) seems valid too. An acquired company with different regulations could justify a separate org.

upvoted 0 times

...

Alisha

7 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

7 months ago

Hey, did you find any good reasons for UC to switch to a multi-org strategy?

upvoted 0 times

...