Universal Containers, a global corporation of 50,000 users, has a 24x7 call center operated by 20,000 users that includes employees and contractors. Their sales organization is 10,000 strong and they started processing about 100,000 updates to opportunity custom fields called Priority and NextStep. They also started processing
20,000 updates to a highly nested territory hierarchy. There was a third mass update on a Next Step field on the Action Plan custom object that has Case as a lookup field. Users started seeing a Group membership lock error in the system. What is a probable cause for this error?

• A.Lock contention due to system-initiated sharing rule recalculation
• B.Lock contention on Case records because of Action Plan custom object updates.
• C.Lock contention on Territory object because of Territory object updates.
• D.Lock contention on Account records because of Opportunity object updates.

Comment: *

Name: *

Email: *

Verification: *

...From customers on company Issued desktops and uses case object to track customer issues and grievances.
The company would like to capture
images of customer site captured by field consultants while they are editing the case record during customer site visit. The Director of IT wants to minimize customization and promote reusability of code artifacts wherever possible, what recommendations should an architect give to the company to implement the image capture requirement, while ensuring customer that the service rep can continue to use same lightning pages they were trained to use?

• A.So Use Lightning Component as an override for "Edit" action on lightning experience allowing image capture feature. Detect the form factor of the device and redirect the user to the default not overridden view.
• B.Create 4 separate button "Edit in Mobile", which opens & custom lightning component that will allow field consultants to add an image. No change required for desktop users.
• C.Use Lightning Component as an override for "Edit'' action on mobile view allowing image capture feature. No Change required for desktop users.

Comment: *

Name: *

Email: *

Verification: *

Universal Containers has selected a small and diverse group of users to review inactive accounts. Given the Private sharing model, a public group was created and made available to this group of users. A sharing rule was created to make inactive Accounts visible to the public group. However some of these users are reporting they don't see any of the Accounts that were shared with the public group.
What is the underlying issue for these users?

• A.The Accounts are owned by users higher in the role hierarchy.
• B.The page layout assigned to these users is different than the Account owner.
• C.The users are in profiles that have no access to the Account object.
• D.The users have a permission set that only allow Accounts in "Active" status.

Comment: *

Name: *

Email: *

Verification: *

Customer complaints for bad interactions with a customer support agent are logged as Cases and assigned to a human resources representative. The agent of the complaint should not see the case, but their manager should.
How is this accomplished?

• A.Criteria based Sharing Rule on Case that shares to the Role Manager and above when a custom field Assigned Agent (subject of the complaint) is not blank.
• B.Trigger on Case ta lookup and share to the manager of an Assigned Agent custom field (the subject of the complaint) using Apex Managed Sharing.
• C.Case is owned by the subject of the complaint, so their manager in the role hierarchy can access the record. CRED permission are removed on Case so the agent cannot read the case record.

Comment: *

Name: *

Email: *

Verification: *

Universal Containers uses the standard Case object to track various support requests sent to servicing agents.
Currently, the Case object has more than 400 fields. Eight different types of case processes have been established, each with a unique combination of statuses. The Director of Customer Service wants to ensure that servicing agents see only the required information specific to the case type they are addressing.
Which option is recommended to implement this requirement?

• A.Use Dynamic Forms with different field sections representing the relevant fields per case type, and control visibility of sections by Case Record Type value.
• B.Use different Page Layouts per case type, each representing the relevant fields per case type.
• C.Use a custom LWC to override the View action of the Case object, and a Custom Metadata Type to define the relevant fields per case type.

Comment: *

Name: *

Email: *

Verification: *