Workflow: Quiz

[QuizIntro]

[RCNotLoggedInNotAdmin]

[/RCNotLoggedInNotAdmin]

[RCAdmin]

[WpProQuiz 29]

[/RCAdmin]

35 thoughts on “Workflow: Quiz”

  1. Question for options are bit strange.

    CSR closes case twice 10/1/2013 & 10/5/2013. So options should have been 17/1/2013 & 17/05/2013. However I see options for dates involving 10/08 & 10/12. Isn’t that strange?

  3. So Question 1 sounds as if the outcome can be completed with a simple approval process and not require any validation rule. If the approval process can update status what is the validation rule for? Wouldn’t the approval process prevent the changing of the status?

    1. The approval process would not prevent changing the stage- that’s what the validation rule would be used for. You wouldn’t typically want to make the field read-only as the sales team would still need to advance/change stages leading up to closed/won.

        1. The approval process would lock the record once the approval is submitted. However, before the record is submitted for approval, the validation rule would needed to prevent changing the stage to closed/won.

          1. So there is no method to create an approval process that prevents the change of status and then modifies the status once approved or retain the status if denied? This sounds like an application that would increase the functionality of the approval process.

          2. An approval process will lock the record when submitted for approval.

            I am a sales rep and I need to be able to change the stage – eg from prospecting to proposal.

            I am supposed to submit for approval to mark the stage as closed won. When I click submit for approval it locks the record and I can’t change the approval stage. Once approved it updates the stage to closed won. All is good.

            Until – instead of submitting for approval, I just change the stage to closed won, because I am sneaky.

            There needs to be a rule defined to prevent this before the approval process blocks this change.

            If the stage field weren’t normally modifiable (eg reps didn’t need to change from prospecting to proposal) then you could make the field read only and you would t need the validation rule.

            Approvals, validation rules ETC are just tools you’ve got to piece together to support a process.

  4. In Q4, there seems to be an implication in the comment “no further actions are pending.”. Are we to infer that the outcome would be different if there were pending actions? And, if so, what would the new outcome be?

    1. No, that was essentially just stating that the time based action that was pending was unscheduled as the workflow condition is no longer met. Actions are only going to be pending when the record meets the workflow criteria and that initiates a time-based action.

      You could have multiple workflow rules with multiple time-based actions on each, the combination of all rules and the conditions met by the record would ultimately drive the actions. Long winded explanation but hopefully that makes sense.

  5. Thanks John! I have just passed my exam yesterday! Your notes and prompt explanations really help a lot! The resource kit is definitely worth every cent. Thanks so much 🙂

  6. Thanks for the well elaborated explanation John! Another question for Q1: The VP of sales must approve any opportunity with an amount greater than 100,000 USD before the opportunity stage can reach “Closed/Won”. Which of the following components must be configured in order to enforce this process? (Select 2)

    Why not option 2 as well, i.e. Workflow Rules?

    1. The field would be updated to close/won via the approval process – you would use a workflow action (a field update) in the approval process, but you wouldn’t need an actual workflow rule (because the approval process can call the action when approved).

  7. Understand your explanation John. Was actually asking if the rule evaluation criteria is changed to I) “created” and the other case ii) “created and any time it’s edited (only)” ? instead of “created and any time it’s edited and subsequently changed to meet criteria”, what will be the new dates then?

    1. If it were set to created, then the rule would never fire as the case would not be created with the status closed. However, if the case were created with the status closed, then the rule would be pending for execution in 7 days. If after 3 days the status were changed, then the rule would be cancelled. Updating the status to closed again would not re-trigger the rule, as the rule is no longer being evaluated (b/c the record was already created).

  8. Hi John, for Q4, I must say it is a brilliant question. I have always been confused for workflow rules. Just to check with you if the question is to be tweaked to: A workflow rule has been created to email the case contact 7 days after case closure. There are 2 scenarios which may be when the rule evaluation criteria is I) “created” ii) “created and any time it’s edited (only)” without the ‘ to subsequently meet criteria’) and the rule criteria is “Case Status Equals Closed”. Does it mean the trigger dates now that the evaluation criteria is changed, will be: i) 10/08/2013? ii) 10/10/2013 (7 days after the status is edited to Working), 10/12/2013 (7 days after the status is edited again)? My exam is tomorrow, failed last Fri sigh, hope to receive your explanation soon to pass this time after trying your questions! Thanks John!

    1. When the case status is closed, the workflow rule is scheduled to execute 7 days later. Therefore the rule would only be active 10/1-10/3 (averted when changed to working) – this cancels the pending action. Then 10/5 the action is then scheduled again for execution 7 days out. Hope that helps… good luck!

  9. Observation: Question 4 helps identify two of the four options in Question 3 (i.e., “By creating an approval process”) as being not-in-the-running as correct answers, since Q4 states that “A workflow rule has been created to email the case contact 7 days after case closure” and Q3 asks how the same can be accomplished. By inference, the “Send an email” choice in Q2 in confirmed to be one of the three as well. Hopefully, the SF test reveals the same kind of recursive hints (if needed).

  10. Got to agree with Daniel….I slapped myself when I saw that. The update on 10/03/2013 basically rendered the 10/01/2013 trigger null and void. Cleverly worded question and reinforces the fact that I need to dwell and reread the questions at least 2-3 times to really let the question(s) sink in.

    On a side note John, in the exams are they in the local date format? FTR, I am in Australia and whilst 10/1/2013 and 10/3/2013 don’t require any additional thinking for people in the US, it does require a bit of a ‘mental truffle shuffle’ to contextualise the dates/time-dependent triggers to our format (i.e. 01/10/13 and 03/10/2013) ….Not a showstopper question, but curious all the same.

  11. Hi John,

    For Question #4, if ”the time-based action is scheduled to execute” on both 10/8/2013 and 10/12/2013, how is it that the correct answer for this question is that the case contact will receive a case closure email on 10/12/2013 only?

    Thanks for your clarification.

    1. Think about it. It’s a “gotchya” type question. I got it wrong and groaned afterward because I didn’t fully think through the workflow process.

      John explains it to us when we get the answer incorrect: CSR sets Status of case 00001022 to “Working” on 10/3/2013.

      –> This exits the workflow rule criteria. The time-base action is unscheduled; no further actions are pending.

      Yes, the case was closed 10/1/2013, but because 10/3/2013 is when the status was set to working again, the criteria that was originally met to send the 10/8/2013 is no longer being met. The time-based action isn’t going to trigger. However, it will trigger on 10/12/2013 because the case was closed again on 10/5/2013, assuming no additional action is taken.

      Well played John….well played.

      1. To fully configure that scenario, you would need to use validation rules, field updates (within the approval process), and an approval process. I agree the wording for this is confusing; I will change the question.

        Thanks for the feedback!

Leave a Reply