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

A consultant is validating a manager-led internal move process in a public cloud SAP SuccessFactors Employee Central tenant before user training. In the web-based UI, managers can select company and department, but for one newly activated operating structure the location list is narrower than expected and omits the location that should be valid for the selected organizational combination. Other structures show the correct filtered locations.
HR leadership confirms the missing location was added during the latest corporate data maintenance cycle and must remain visible only for approved combinations. The customer does not want to broaden location availability across unrelated structures or use temporary placeholder values during moves. The consultant must correct the issue without changing the standard move process.
What is the best next step?
Response:

• A. Ask managers to choose a temporary location and let HR operations correct the final value after the transaction is completed.
• B. Broaden location visibility for all related structures so managers can always find the missing value during internal moves.
• C. Create duplicate location records for the new structure so the intended value appears separately in the selection list.
• D. Review the organizational associations for company, department, and location in the new structure, then correct the relationship controlling filtered location availability.

A consultant is supporting a scheduled import of future-dated employee job-profile corrections in a public cloud SAP SuccessFactors Employee Central tenant before a monthly governance review. The file processes correctly for most employees, but a subset completes with warnings and leaves the target records unchanged. Those employees already have approved future workflow requests for manager changes in the same effective period.
The customer wants the job-profile corrections preserved without deleting the approved future manager changes, because those requests were already validated and are part of the operating plan. They also do not want a permanent manual exception process for employees who have approved future updates. The consultant must restore a repeatable and governance-aligned administrative load.
What is the best next step?
Response:

• A. Retry the warning rows under a broader administrative role so the import can override the approved future state during this monthly cycle.
• B. Delete the approved future manager-change workflow requests, then rerun the warning rows so the job-profile correction can load without conflict.
• C. Exclude employees with approved future workflow requests from all future job-profile imports and require HR administrators to maintain those cases manually.
• D. Adjust the import handling for employees with overlapping approved future changes so the job-profile correction fits into the effective-dated timeline without replacing later records.

<strong>CHALLENGE 3 &#x2014; Plant Manager Access for Workforce Boundaries</strong> Plant managers request temporary access to all engineering and production positions so they can help close open hypercare cases. The HR governance lead wants plant-level visibility controls to remain observable.
Which configuration approach best handles this governance-versus-governance prioritization?
Response:

• A. Grant cross-plant access temporarily and rely on post-hypercare review to identify any inappropriate record visibility.
• B. Validate assigned-scope access and target populations with representative plant managers before considering any limited exception.
• C. Keep current access unchanged and classify all blocked hypercare cases as evidence that the plant model is secure.
• D. Restrict plant managers from all engineering positions until production transfer processing is fully stabilized.

A consultant is validating a manager-driven internal movement process in a public cloud SAP SuccessFactors Employee Central Core tenant before a pilot launch. In the web-based UI, the transaction saves for all tested employees, but for one newly introduced employee category the expected post-save update to a related employment information field does not occur when the movement reason is marked as temporary.
Permanent movement reasons work correctly for the same category, and older employee categories behave as expected for both cases. The customer wants to keep a single standardized movement process across the tenant and does not want HR operations to repair the related field manually after each temporary movement.
What should the consultant investigate first?
Response:

• A. Grant managers direct edit access to the related employment information field so they can complete the missing update in the same transaction cycle.
• B. Ask HR operations to maintain the related employment information field manually for temporary moves in the new category until after pilot completion.
• C. Review the transaction configuration or derivation dependency for temporary movement reasons in the newly introduced employee category, then correct the post-save update logic.
• D. Reclassify employees in the new category into an older category during temporary moves so the existing update behavior can be reused.

<strong>CHALLENGE 3 &#x2014; Resort Manager Access for Hospitality Boundaries</strong> Resort operations managers request broader visibility across hotel, conference, and banquet positions so they can help clear remediation items. The HR governance owner wants resort-level access boundaries to remain visible during the remediation cycle.
Which configuration approach best handles this governance-versus-governance prioritization?
Response:

• A. Validate assigned-scope access and target populations with representative resort managers before considering any limited exception.
• B. Restrict resort operations managers from all banquet positions until housekeeping validation is fully complete.
• C. Keep current access unchanged and classify all blocked remediation items as evidence that the resort model is secure.
• D. Grant cross-resort access temporarily and rely on post-remediation review to identify any inappropriate record visibility.