Manually validating change sets before deployment is a recommended practice to avoid possible delays while deploying a change set, as it can help you identify and resolve any errors or dependencies before the actual deployment. Change set performance is not independent of included components, as some components may take longer to deploy than others. Manually creating new custom objects and new custom fields or manually applying the field type changes are not advisable, as they can introduce human errors and inconsistencies between environments. See Deploy Changes with Change Sets for more details.

The best practice for moving classes between packages is to set them as deprecated in the source package and recreate them in the target package. This way, the existing subscribers of the source package will not be affected by the change, and the new subscribers of the target package will get the updated classes. Moving the classes directly or changing their names can cause compilation errors and dependency issues.

Creating transparency by being honest and clear about timing, planning, and obstacles is one of the Scrum principles, as it helps to build trust and collaboration among the team and the stakeholders. Delivering working software is also a Scrum principle, but it does not mean that the software should not be changed if it is working. Respect is another Scrum principle, but it does not imply that a developer should not test the software, as testing is part of the development process. Embracing change is also a Scrum principle, but it does not mean that the scope should change every day, as that would make it impossible to deliver value and quality.

A virtual Kanban board tool is a good way to increase transparency and collaboration among agile development teams, as it allows them to visualize their work, track their progress, and identify any bottlenecks or issues. A daily stand-up meeting, a daily email, or a shared spreadsheet are not as effective or efficient as a Kanban board tool.

 Agile development methodology allows for frequent and incremental releases of functional code, which enables stakeholders to provide feedback and validate the requirements. Agile development methodology also embraces changes in the project requirements as the business needs evolve, and adapts to them accordingly.

Refreshing all non-preview sandboxes during the release preview window is the best way to handle the situation of having a mix of preview and non-preview instances for the release of a major project. A release preview window is a period of time before a Salesforce seasonal release, where the customers can test their applications and integrations in a sandbox that has the same version as the upcoming release. By refreshing all non-preview sandboxes during this window, the architect can ensure that all the sandboxes are aligned with the same version and avoid any conflicts or errors during the deployment. Refreshing the sandboxes when the release management team has time, mixing instance types, or contacting support to rollback the release are not good practices, as they can cause inconsistency, confusion, or disruption in the release process.

When migrating a flow with change sets, the following statements should be considered: When a change set with a multiple versioned flow is uploaded, it includes only the active version of the flow. When a change set with a multiple versioned flow is uploaded, and no active version is available, it includes the most recent inactive version of the flow. These statements are based on the Salesforce documentation on how change sets handle flows with multiple versions. The other statements are incorrect, as they do not reflect the actual behavior of change sets.

Two advantages of automated test data loads over manual data loads are that automated loads can be done with no human oversight and that automated loads are reliable in their results. Automated loads can be scheduled and executed without human intervention, which saves time and effort. Automated loads can also ensure that the data is consistent and accurate, which reduces errors and risks. Automated loads do not necessarily increase costs, as they can also save money in the long run by improving efficiency and quality. Automated loads can also be scripted by CICD tools, which is one of the benefits of using them.

C and D are the best approaches to develop customizations once and make them available in both orgs, as they use packages that can be installed and updated in multiple orgs. A is not a good approach, as it does not allow for versioning and dependency management of the customizations. B is not a good approach, as it does not support deploying metadata components between orgs.

 An application with many systems and inter-dependencies between components is a project situation that favors a waterfall methodology, as it requires a high level of planning and design upfront to ensure the integration and compatibility of the components. An application with regulatory compliance requirements to be validated by outside agencies is also a project situation that favors a waterfall methodology, as it requires a clear and detailed documentation of the requirements and specifications, as well as a formal and rigorous testing and validation process. An application in post-production, with incremental changes made by a small team is a project situation that favors an agile methodology, as it allows for faster and more frequent delivery of changes, as well as more flexibility and collaboration. An in-house application with a fixed team size, but an open timeline and flexible requirements is also a project situation that favors an agile methodology, as it allows for more creativity and experimentation, as well as more feedback and adaptation.

 Three advantages of using the SFDX are: can store code on a local machine, or a version control system; can create scratch orgs; and can install application metadata from a central repository. These advantages can help improve the development experience, as they allow developers to work with source-driven development, use ephemeral and configurable environments, and access metadata components from a shared location. Can quickly deploy metadata using Execute Anonymous is not an advantage of using the SFDX, as Execute Anonymous is a feature of the Developer Console that allows running Apex code, not deploying metadata. Can use native Deployment Rollback Tool to quickly revert to prior state is also not an advantage of using the SFDX, as there is no such tool in the SFDX. See [Salesforce DX] for more details.

The architect should recommend creating two second generation managed packages with the same namespace and setting the methods that should be shared with the @namespaceAccessible annotation. This will allow the Sales team to access the specific functions of the Service product without exposing them to other teams or customers. Creating two managed packages with different namespaces will not allow the Sales team to access the Service functions, unless they are declared as global, which will expose them to everyone. Creating a managed package with both products will not allow the separation of the products and the control of the functions. Creating an authentication function in the Service package will add unnecessary complexity and overhead to the solution.

 The Metadata API is mainly used for file-based deployment, such as deploying an application from a Developer Edition org to the AppExchange, or from a sandbox org to a production org. The Ant Migration Tool is a wrapper around the Metadata API, so it is not a direct use case for writing code to call retrieve() and deploy() methods. The Salesforce CLI (SFDX) uses the Source-Driven Development model, which relies on the source code as the source of truth, rather than the Metadata API.

Aura accessibility tests can be called in JSTEST and WebDriver Test environments. JSTEST is a JavaScript testing framework that runs on Node.js and can be used to test Aura components. WebDriver Test is a Selenium-based testing framework that can be used to test the user interface and accessibility of Aura components. ACCTEST and AuraDriver Test are not valid environments for calling Aura accessibility tests.

 A is the correct answer, as generating a destructivechanges.xml file and deploying the package via the Force.com Migration Tool is the best way to manage the deletions of metadata components across sandbox environments and production with minimal impact on other work streams. A destructivechanges.xml file is a special file that specifies the components to be deleted from an org, and can be deployed using the Force.com Migration Tool, which is a command-line tool that uses the Metadata API to retrieve and deploy metadata components. This method can help to automate and streamline the deletion process, as well as ensure consistency and accuracy across the environments. B is incorrect, as performing deletes manually in a sandbox and then deploying a change set to production is not a good way to manage the deletions, as it can introduce errors and inconsistencies, as well as require additional steps and permissions. C is incorrect, as assigning business analysts to perform the deletes and splitting up the work between them is not a good way to manage the deletions, as it can create confusion and complexity, as well as lack of coordination and integration. D is incorrect, as deleting the components in production and then refreshing all sandboxes to receive the changes is not a good way to manage the deletions, as it can disrupt the production environment and the ongoing development and testing activities in the sandboxes. You can learn more about this topic in the Deploy Changes with the Force.com Migration Tool unit on Trailhead.

Integrating an agile issue tracker with software testing and continuous integration tools can provide the following benefits:

• Developers can see automated test statuses that commit on a specific user story, which can help them identify and fix any errors or failures quickly.
• Developers can use the committed code’s build status directly on the user story record, which can help them track the progress and quality of their work.

 A and C are the correct answers, as they are the project situations that favor an agile methodology. An agile methodology is a flexible and iterative approach that can accommodate changing requirements, deliver value quickly, and enable frequent feedback and collaboration. A is correct, as a digitization project to update an existing customer-facing process and enable quick adjustments is a situation that requires an agile methodology, as it involves transforming a legacy system, adapting to customer needs, and delivering incremental improvements. C is correct, as an environment with a heavy investment in DevOps capabilities for rapid testing and deployment is a situation that requires an agile methodology, as it enables continuous integration and delivery, as well as quality assurance and automation. B is incorrect, as a project to be executed by a third party, with a fixed and formal scope, budget, and timeline is a situation that favors a waterfall methodology, as it involves clear and stable requirements, contractual obligations, and sequential phases. D is incorrect, as a project with well-defined requirements and complex interactions between front- and back-end systems is a situation that favors a waterfall methodology, as it involves detailed planning, design, and testing, as well as minimal changes and dependencies. You can learn more about this topic in the Agile Basics module on Trailhead.

 Identifying the relevant data and verifying the data integrity can help ensure the quality and accuracy of the migrated data. Using a full sandbox and performing test runs with real data can help validate the migration process and identify any issues or risks.

 The two actions that can effectively contribute to the quality and agility of the team are: Define and follow code standards, and use static code analysis tool in the pipeline before manual code review. Code standards can help ensure consistency, readability, and maintainability of the code, as well as reduce errors and bugs. A static code analysis tool can help automate the code review process and identify any issues or violations of the code standards before the manual review. Choosing the most senior developer to help the technical lead or skipping the code review are not effective actions, as they can lead to more errors and delays.

 Automated browser testing and static code quality analysis are two quality assurance techniques that can help minimize defects in software projects, and that an architect should recommend for Universal Containers to incorporate into its overall CI/CD pipeline. Automated browser testing is a technique that involves using tools or frameworks to simulate user interactions with the web application across different browsers and devices, and to verify the functionality and performance of the application. Static code quality analysis is a technique that involves using tools or frameworks to scan the code and detect any violations of the predefined coding rules and best practices, such as syntax errors, security issues, code smells, etc. Business verification testing and stress testing are also quality assurance techniques, but they are not as suitable or relevant for the CI/CD pipeline, as they are more focused on validating the business requirements and the system capacity.

The org development model is a traditional approach that uses sandboxes as the primary development environments. It relies on tools such as change sets, the Ant Migration Tool, or the Metadata API to deploy changes between orgs. One of the benefits of this model is that it allows automated deployment, meaning that the deployment process can be scripted and executed without manual intervention. This can save time and reduce errors. Another benefit of this model is that it allows automated sandbox provisioning, meaning that the creation and configuration of sandboxes can be done programmatically using the Sandbox API or the Salesforce CLI. This can help maintain consistency and alignment across different environments. Automated defect fixing and automated change tracking are not characteristics of the org development model, but rather of the package development model, which uses source code as the source of truth and supports source tracking and automated testing.

 In the post refresh plan, modifying external ids to a known valid set of values for UAT is the best way to resolve the issue of objects that have external ids from production no longer pointing to valid external ids in the UAT environment. This way, the data integrity and consistency across the integrated systems can be maintained. Letting UAT point to production integrations and rolling back each transaction after it finishes is not a good practice, as it can cause data loss or corruption in production. Deleting all the data and using an automated testing tool to create new data across all the systems in UAT is not feasible, as it can take a lot of time and resources. Masking the external id so nobody can see the production value is not a solution, as it does not address the underlying problem of invalid references.

Designing the right sandbox strategy for the release is a best practice, as it helps to ensure the quality and consistency of the code/configuration across different environments. Regression testing is mandatory for each release, as it helps to verify that the existing functionality is not broken by the new changes. Maintaining a pre/post deployment checklist for each release is a best practice, as it helps to track the tasks and dependencies for each deployment. Release sign-off is not only required for Production, but also for other environments such as UAT and Staging. Publishing a release calendar for each phase of the release is not a best practice, as it may change due to unforeseen circumstances and create confusion.

The advantages of the package development model are improving team development and collaboration, facilitating automated testing and continuous integration, and significantly reducing the need for manually tracking changes. The package development model allows the developers to work on modular and reusable components that can be easily tested and deployed. The package development model does not eliminate the need of using change sets, as they can still be used for deploying non-packaged components or metadata. The package development model does not provide its own source control, but rather relies on external source control systems such as Git.

Change sets for minor releases and metadata API for major releases is the best deployment tool recommendation for both types of releases. Change sets are a native Salesforce tool that allows the team to deploy configuration changes between connected orgs. They are suitable for minor releases that have simple configuration changes, such as adding fields, objects, or workflows. Metadata API is a more advanced tool that allows the team to deploy both configuration and code changes between any orgs. It is suitable for major releases that have large number of complex code components, such as Apex classes, triggers, Visualforce pages, or Lightning components.

Kanban can help clarify whether value is being delivered to the business by using metrics, like lead time and throughput, which increase transparency. Lead time measures how long it takes to complete a work item from the time it is requested, and throughput measures how many work items are completed in a given time period. These metrics can help the business stakeholders see the progress and performance of the development teams, and align their expectations with the reality. Kanban does not respond to unplanned work and changes by dropping everything and jumping on the new request, as this would disrupt the flow and quality of work. Kanban does not make use of the Salesforce Agile Accelerator, as this is a tool for managing agile projects. Kanban does limit work in progress, but this is not the main reason why it can help clarify whether value is being delivered to the business.

Three areas that should be tested as part of data migration are: data transformation against source system, contact association with correct account, and account and lead ownership. These areas can help ensure that the data is migrated correctly and accurately, and that the relationships and ownership are preserved. Lead assignment is not an area that should be tested as part of data migration, as it is a business process that is triggered after the data is migrated. Page layout assignments is also not an area that should be tested as part of data migration, as it is a configuration setting that is independent of the data. See Data Migration for more details.

To delete metadata with a deploy() call, two things are needed: a package.xml file and a destructiveChanges.xml file. The package.xml file specifies the API version and the components to be deployed, while the destructiveChanges.xml file specifies the components to be deleted. The API version does not have to be the current one, as long as it is compatible with the components. The purgeOnDelete option is not required, as it only determines whether the deleted components are stored in the recycle bin or not.

To improve the performance of the development teams, the following ways can be suggested: Define and follow code standards, and implement a sprint review process. Code standards can help ensure consistency, readability, and maintainability of the code, as well as reduce errors and bugs. A sprint review process can help evaluate the work done in each sprint, demonstrate the functionality, and gather feedback from the stakeholders and users.

A single-org strategy is the best option for UC, as it will enable them to achieve business process standardization among all business units, which is the main goal of the CEO. A multi-org strategy would make it harder to enforce consistent processes and policies across the different business units, and would also increase the costs and complexity of managing multiple orgs. A common managed package could help with some aspects of standardization, but it would not cover all the possible scenarios and customizations that UC might need.

A, C, and E are the correct answers, as Force.com Migration Tool, Source Control Tool, and Continuous Integration Build Tool are the tools that should be used to enable a continuous integration process to help manage code quality. A continuous integration process is a practice that involves merging code changes from multiple developers into a common repository, and then testing and validating them automatically, before deploying them to the target environment. Force.com Migration Tool is a tool that uses the Metadata API to retrieve and deploy metadata components, such as code, from one org to another. Source Control Tool is a tool that manages the versions and changes of the code, and allows for collaboration and integration among the developers. Continuous Integration Build Tool is a tool that automates the testing and deployment of the code, and ensures that the code meets the quality and functionality standards. B is incorrect, as Full Sandbox Environment is not a tool that should be used to enable a continuous integration process, as it is a copy of a production org that is used for development and testing purposes, but not for merging, testing, or deploying code changes. D is incorrect, as Project Management Tool is not a tool that should be used to enable a continuous integration process, as it is a tool that helps to plan, organize, and track the progress of the project, but not to manage, test, or deploy code changes. You can learn more about these tools in the Continuous Integration and Continuous Delivery module on Trailhead.

These are the correct answers because the project steering committee plays a role in approving deviations from the chosen methodology, when required to address project issues, and setting the criteria for selecting agile or waterfall methodology to be used on internal projects. The steering committee does not design a methodology, but rather chooses one from the existing ones. The steering committee does not enforce that corporate project stage gates are part of the chosen methodology but rather ensures that the chosen methodology aligns with the corporate project stage gates.

To track Salesforce metadata throughout the development lifecycle across sandboxes and production, the architect should recommend using an AppExchange or third-party tool that is specialized in Salesforce deployment. These tools can provide features such as version control, dependency analysis, automated testing, and rollback capabilities. Using an Excel sheet to track deployment steps and document the SFDX commands is not a reliable or scalable solution, as it is prone to human errors and does not provide any automation or validation. Using ChangeSet to track deployed customizations is also not a good option, as ChangeSet is limited in the types of metadata it can deploy and does not support versioning or dependency management. Using Salesforce SFDX commands to deploy to different sandboxes is a possible solution, but it requires a high level of technical expertise and does not provide a graphical interface or reporting capabilities.

A full sandbox would be appropriate for diagnosing reports of poor performance when accessing certain Visualforce pages, as it provides a complete copy of the production data and metadata, which allows the developers to replicate and troubleshoot the issue in a realistic environment. A partial copy sandbox would not be appropriate, as it only provides a sample of the production data, which may not reflect the actual volume and complexity of the data that affects the performance. A developer sandbox would not be appropriate, as it only provides a copy of the production metadata, but not the data, which makes it impossible to test the performance of the Visualforce pages with real data. A developer pro sandbox would not be appropriate, as it also only provides a copy of the production metadata, but not the data, which makes it impossible to test the performance of the Visualforce pages with real data.

The Executive Steering Committee is the management team that is empowered to approve additional budget requirements for a project, as they are responsible for providing strategic direction, oversight, and governance for the project. The Security Review Committee is responsible for ensuring that the project meets the security standards and policies of the organization. The Project Management Committee is responsible for managing the day-to-day activities and deliverables of the project. The Change Control Board is responsible for reviewing and approving any changes to the project scope, schedule, or resources.

The testing of the JavaScript part of the Aura component can be tested in the Jest framework and the Apex controllers can be tested using test classes. The testing can be viewed in the lightning.force.com/c/jasminetests.app URL. The page loads and runs Jasmine test and writes pass/fail information to the screen. The Lightning test service AppExchange package is not required for testing Aura components, but for testing Lightning web components. The $T test helper object is not a valid object for testing Lightning components.

The architect should recommend using Git to create a release branch from the develop branch. All fixes must be made in the release branch. After deployment, merge release with develop. This strategy allows the team to isolate the changes that are ready for deployment from the changes that are still in progress. It also ensures that the fixes are applied to both the release and the develop branches. The other options do not follow the best practices of Git branching and merging.

The best approaches for UC to consider are B and C, as they both involve agile methodologies that can accommodate changing requirements and deliver value to the end users in an iterative and collaborative way. Option B is a good approach, as it allows UC to scope and estimate the project, identify the minimum viable product, and co-create the design with the project stakeholders using a product backlog and sprints2. Option C is also a good approach, as it allows UC to gather the remaining requirements and complete the architecture and design, then initiate the build/test processes with frequent reviews by the stakeholders, and perform acceptance testing and validate compliance with regulatory requirements3. Option A is not a good approach, as it involves a waterfall project that is rigid and sequential, and may result in re-work and delays if the requirements change or conflict4. Option D is not a realistic approach, as it assumes that budget and timeline will not be a factor with an agile methodology, which is not true, as agile projects still need to have clear scope, budget, and timeline constraints

An unmanaged package is a suitable option for deploying an application from a contractor’s own Salesforce to UC’s Salesforce environments. An unmanaged package allows the contractor to share the application code with UC, while giving UC full control and ownership of the code. An unmanaged package also does not require a namespace prefix or a security review.

This is the correct answer because having developers work in separate branches and merge their changes in a common branch for testing can reduce the risk of overwriting others’ changes and ensure code quality and consistency. Having all developers work in the same branch or in the HEAD may cause conflicts and errors. Not using source control is not a good practice and may result in data loss and lack of version control.

The usual symptoms of inadequate negative tests are the ones that indicate that the code is not handling the possible errors or exceptions that may occur in different scenarios. For example, when an Apex batch job runs at a scheduled time, an increased number of Apex execution errors occur over all1, this means that the code is not handling the possible concurrency issues, governor limits, or data quality issues that may arise when the job runs. Similarly, when an Apex process runs into an un-handled exception when an HTTP callout has an unexpected status code in the response body1, this means that the code is not handling the possible network issues, authentication issues, or API errors that may occur when making the callout. Another symptom is when developers constantly ask the testers for a screenshot of the error and the exact steps of reproducing the error1, this means that the code is not logging the error details or providing meaningful error messages to the users. Option A is incorrect because turning to the debug log for details of the failed Apex executions is not a symptom of inadequate negative tests, but a normal practice of debugging the code. Option E is incorrect because the delivered user interfaces are not meeting the expectations of the business users is not a symptom of inadequate negative tests, but a symptom of poor user interface design or incomplete requirements.

 D is the correct answer, as the Agile methodology is the best way to handle a project with a fixed deadline and a changing scope, such as retiring a business-critical application that will no longer be supported. The Agile methodology allows for frequent feedback, iterative development, and adaptive planning, which can help to deliver a working solution on time and within budget. A is incorrect, as executive leadership is not a methodology, but a role that can support the project. B is incorrect, as a requirements traceability matrix is a tool that can help to track the requirements and their fulfillment, but not a methodology. C is incorrect, as a business continuity plan is a document that outlines how to resume business operations in the event of a disruption, but not a methodology. You can learn more about the Agile methodology in the Agile Basics module on Trailhead.

A change to a multi-org strategy can be justified by two reasons: launching a new line of business with independent processes and acquiring a company that has its own Salesforce org and operates in a different business with its own set of regulatory requirements. These reasons indicate that the single-org strategy is no longer feasible or optimal, as it would require too much customization, complexity, and compliance. Using Chatter for collaboration among different business units is not a reason to change to a multi-org strategy, as Chatter can work across multiple orgs. Following a unification enterprise architecture operating model is also not a reason to change to a multi-org strategy, as this model implies having orgs with the same processes implemented for each business unit, which is more suitable for a single-org strategy.

Managed package is the recommended mechanism for releasing an application that can be installed in other Salesforce environments. Managed packages allow for versioning, licensing, and upgradeability of the application. They also protect the intellectual property of the developer by hiding the source code of the Apex classes and Visualforce pages.

The package development model relies on source tracking to automatically track the metadata changes in the package project. However, not all metadata components are supported by source tracking, and some changes may need to be tracked manually. For example, changes to profiles, permission sets, custom metadata types, and custom settings are not supported by source tracking. You can find the list of unsupported components here1. No manual tracking is required for the changes that are supported by source tracking, nor for the changes made via the Setup UI, as they are automatically captured by the package development model.

 The Metadata API can be used to migrate configuration changes between two organizations or export current customization in the organization as an xml file. The Metadata API allows developers to retrieve, deploy, create, update, or delete the metadata components that define the structure and behavior of the Salesforce org. The Metadata API cannot perform CRUD operations to manage records in the organization or migrate data changes between two organizations using a csv file. These operations require the use of other APIs, such as the REST API or the Bulk API.

 DevPro1 cannot be cloned because it is on a different version from Production, as it was upgraded to preview for the next Salesforce major release two weeks ago. Therefore, the architect should recommend creating a new DevPro2, and migrating metadata from DevPro1. This way, the second work stream can work on the Service Cloud requirements in a separate sandbox, without affecting the Sales Cloud dev team. Asking the second work stream team to work on the same DevPro1 sandbox would create conflicts and dependencies between the two teams, and would not allow them to release at different times. Pushing back on the requirements because adding another work stream will bring some risks with it would not be a good option, as the business needs might be urgent and important.

 A and C are the characteristics of an effective communication plan, as they enable feedback, collaboration, and transparency among the stakeholders. B is not a characteristic of an effective communication plan, as it does not account for changes in the stakeholder list or their communication preferences. D is not a characteristic of an effective communication plan, as it limits the information sharing and trust among the stakeholders.

The most challenging factor to consider in merging the two Salesforce.com orgs into a single org is the customer data, as it may contain duplicates, inconsistencies, and conflicts. Option D suggests using standardization and de-duplication tools to merge the customer data, which is a reasonable approach. Option A is not true, as transactional sales data may have different formats, fields, and values in the two orgs. Option B is not necessary, as salespersons selling both product lines can use a single login in the merged org. Option C is not true, as business processes on standard objects may have different workflows, validation rules, and triggers in the two orgs.

Following an ALM process can help avoid defects from being deployed to production, by ensuring that the code is tested and validated in different environments before reaching the end users. It can also help release new features on a consistent schedule, by establishing a clear roadmap and timeline for the development and deployment phases. Moreover, it can help prevent existing working functionality from stopping, by implementing backup and rollback strategies, as well as monitoring and troubleshooting tools. Training new users after each minor and major release is not a benefit of ALM, but rather a best practice for user adoption and change management. Defining metrics for application development project success is not a benefit of ALM, but rather a part of the project management and evaluation process.

The optimal way to store the service centers as technical reference data is to add them to a custom metadata type. Custom metadata types allow you to create, update, and deploy records that are defined by a custom object. Custom metadata types are similar to list custom settings, but they have some advantages, such as being deployable, queryable, and packageable. Hierarchical custom settings are not suitable for storing multiple records of the same type, and defining a new custom object with a picklist field is unnecessary and inefficient.

Refreshing a sandbox during the release preview window to ensure they have the upcoming release is a step that the team at UC should take to prepare for the new Salesforce release, as it allows them to test their application in an environment that matches the production environment after the upgrade. Running regression tests in an upgraded sandbox to detect any issues with the upgrade is also a step that the team at UC should take to prepare for the new Salesforce release, as it helps them to verify that the existing functionality is not affected by the new features or changes introduced by the upgrade. Reviewing the release notes for automatically-enabled features and technical debt is also a step that the team at UC should take to prepare for the new Salesforce release, as it helps them to understand the impact and benefits of the new features or changes, as well as to identify and resolve any technical debt that may cause issues or conflicts with the upgrade. Contacting Salesforce to schedule a time to upgrade the full sandbox is not a step that the team at UC should take to prepare for the new Salesforce release, as it is not possible to request a specific time for the upgrade of the full sandbox, which is determined by Salesforce and depends on the release window and the pod assignment. Upgrading any SOAP integrations to the newest WSDL as early as possible is not a step that the team at UC should take to prepare for the new Salesforce release, as it is not necessary to upgrade the SOAP integrations to the newest WSDL, unless they want to use the new features or fields introduced by the upgrade. The SOAP integrations will continue to work with the previous WSDL versions, as they are backward compatible.

To move to the package development model, the administrator must enable both the Dev Hub and the Second-Generation Managed Packages in setup. The Dev Hub is the main org where the administrator can create and manage scratch orgs and packages. The Second-Generation Managed Packages are the new format of packages that support modular development and versioning. The Unlocked Packages are a type of second-generation packages that are not tied to a namespace and can be installed and customized in any org. The Source Tracking for Scratch Orgs is a feature that allows the administrator to track the changes made in a scratch org and push or pull them to or from a source repository.

 The success criteria for data migration and the manual and automated data validation approaches are two key areas of UC’s data migration test plan that should be included. The success criteria define the expected outcomes and quality standards for the data migration process. The data validation approaches ensure that the data is accurate, complete, and consistent after the migration.

 This is the correct answer because it is a risk to have a fixed release date and budget, but unknown and changing requirements. This may lead to unrealistic expectations, scope creep, and poor quality of the application. The requirements should be solicited by an external community if they are the end users or stakeholders of the application. The project can use either the waterfall or agile methodology, depending on the nature and complexity of the project, but the methodology should be aligned with the requirements and the release date.

Facilitating the design of a prioritization model with the stakeholders is the best way to overcome the problem of having many backlog items and competing stakeholders who cannot agree on priority. A prioritization model is a framework that helps the stakeholders evaluate and rank the backlog items based on various criteria, such as value, urgency, effort, risk, etc. By using a prioritization model, the stakeholders can have a clear and objective way of deciding which items are more important and should be done first. Organizing a sprint planning meeting, taking over prioritization, or allowing the delivery teams to pick the work are not effective solutions, as they do not address the root cause of the problem or involve the stakeholders in the decision-making process.

The best way to stop the rollbacks from happening is to ensure report metadata is exported daily and that it is merged into the developer branches before the next release. This way, the reports and dashboards will be up to date and consistent across all environments. Using a third-party data warehouse is not a solution, as it does not address the root cause of the rollbacks. Removing the executive’s ability to change reports is not a good practice, as it limits their flexibility and autonomy. Backing up and reimporting the reports before and after the release is not a reliable or scalable solution, as it can introduce errors and inconsistencies.

 D is the correct answer, as the risk with this plan is that multiple work-streams with dependencies could impact the go-live. If the legacy system upgrade and the new integration are not aligned and coordinated, there could be delays, errors, or failures in the project delivery. A is incorrect, as the deadline being scheduled during a Salesforce release is not a risk, but an opportunity to leverage the new features and enhancements that Salesforce provides. B is incorrect, as the project team using the Waterfall methodology is not a risk, but a choice that depends on the project scope, complexity, and requirements. C is incorrect, as the legacy system team using an Agile methodology is not a risk, but a choice that depends on the project scope, complexity, and requirements. You can learn more about the risk management in the Project Management Strategies for Salesforce Implementations module on Trailhead.

 The best option for UC given the scenario is to opt for a multi-org strategy, where each org can have its own sales process, common rules, and operate in locale. A multi-org strategy can accommodate the different languages, sales processes, and legal requirements of the two business units. A multi-org strategy can also allow for more innovation and flexibility, as each org can customize and optimize its own functionality. A single-org strategy may not be able to support the different languages, sales processes, and legal requirements of the two business units. A single-org strategy may also limit the innovation and flexibility, as the org has to follow a standardized and consistent approach.

Implementing the change in the sandbox, validating, and releasing to production and considering that the integration with the ERP system may not function as expected are two considerations when addressing the requirement. The change should be performed in the sandbox first, as it is a best practice to test any changes in a non-production environment before deploying them to production. The change may also affect the integration with the ERP system, as it may require updating the mappings, validations, or transformations between the two systems.

Tracking effort estimates, actuals, and remaining work can help the developer improve their estimation skills and accuracy, which can benefit the project planning and delivery.

The best strategy to delete the day’s test data in a partial copy sandbox every night is to execute a batch job that deletes all records created on the day. This way, you can automate the process of cleaning up the test data and avoid manual work. Manually deleting all records individually is time-consuming and error-prone. Creating a new developer copy sandbox every night is unnecessary and wasteful, as developer copy sandboxes have limited storage and functionality. Refreshing the sandbox every night is also not feasible, as partial copy sandboxes have a refresh interval of 5 days.