SAP Certified - SAP SuccessFactors Employee Central Core and Position Management (C_THR81_2605) Sample Questions:

1. A consultant is testing a workflow for manager-submitted temporary reporting adjustments in SAP SuccessFactors Employee Central Core and Position Management. In the public cloud web-based environment, requests for all tested populations save and enter workflow correctly. However, for one newly added service population, requests that include both a temporary end date and a position-linked supervisory impact go to a fallback queue instead of the intended governance review step.
Existing populations with the same combination still route through governance review. The customer wants to keep the shared workflow model because separate population-specific workflows would increase maintenance after go-live. The consultant must correct the routing behavior without redesigning the broader process or shifting submission to HR administrators.
What is the best corrective action?
Response:

A) Review the routing condition or rule precedence for the new service population, then correct the logic for requests combining temporary end date with position-linked supervisory impact.
B) Ask managers in the new population to stop submitting temporary supervisory changes until the workflow design can be simplified later.
C) Create a separate workflow for the new service population so the governance review step is always included for those requests.
D) Add the governance reviewers to the fallback queue so affected requests still receive oversight before completion.

2. <strong>CHALLENGE 4 &#x2014; Manager Change Workflow for Store and Warehouse Contexts</strong> After a targeted correction to warehouse position context, one manager-change request routes to the expected district reviewer. Another comparable warehouse request still remains with HR operations.
Which next step best avoids a partial-fix trap?
Response:

A) Retest representative manager-change transactions across affected warehouse contexts and compare reviewer outcomes.
B) Apply the same position-context correction to every warehouse record and assume routing will align after refresh.
C) Close workflow validation because at least one corrected warehouse request reached the expected reviewer.
D) Remove HR operations visibility from pending workflow requests so district review becomes the only visible path.

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

4. <strong>CHALLENGE 1 &#x2014; Business Unit References for Insurance Employee Records</strong> The compliance director asks whether the regulated workforce review can begin if only selected insurance records are corrected. Regional HR partners have limited time to repeat foundation data and employee testing.
Which evidence best supports continuing with bounded scope?
Response:

A) Compliance managers can view all insurance records after temporary access expansion.
B) Notification messages are generated for the affected employee data change requests.
C) Corporate HR administrators can manually update all insurance records before the regulated review begins.
D) Affected insurance records are linked to specific adjusted business unit values, and unaffected branch records still validate against the intended pattern.

5. <strong>CHALLENGE 4 &#x2014; Employee Data Workflow for Compliance Review</strong> The implementation partner needs readiness evidence for whether employee data workflow can support the regulated workforce review. Some affected insurance changes remain with corporate HR, while similar branch changes route correctly.
Which evidence best supports a controlled remediation recommendation?
Response:

A) Compliance reviewers receive notification emails for some successful branch employee changes.
B) Representative employee data change tests show that routing follows compliance responsibility when employee and position context align.
C) The team can manually list which insurance requests remain pending with corporate HR.
D) Corporate HR can approve every pending request before the remediation summary is submitted.

Solutions: