Sharing-and-Visibility-Architect Salesforce Certified Sharing and Visibility Architect (WI25) Questions and Answers

To enable community users to collaborate on Opportunities, they must have access to the Opportunity object, which is included in the Partner Community license. This license type is specifically designed for partners and provides access to features like Opportunities, Campaigns, Leads, and other standard objects required for collaborative sales processes.

Option A: Customer Community Plus licenses do not grant access to Opportunities, as they are primarily focused on external customer engagement without sales collaboration.

Option B: Customer Community licenses are limited to basic interactions like viewing and updating cases or accessing content, and they exclude access to Opportunities.

Option C (Correct): Partner Community licenses include access to Opportunities, making them the appropriate choice for this use case.

References:

Community Licenses Overview

To ensure that only lead owners can edit or reassign their leads, the OWD for Lead should be set to Private. In a Private model:

Only the owner (and users above the owner in the Role Hierarchy) can access and edit the record by default.

Redundant lead entries can be minimized by enforcing validation rules or duplicate management logic.

Option A: A Public Read Only/Transfer OWD does not restrict edit access to the lead owner, as anyone with appropriate permissions could edit or transfer the leads.

Option B: Public Read-Only OWD does not align with the requirement to ensure only lead owners can edit or reassign leads.

Option C (Correct): Private OWD ensures that only the lead owner has edit access, adhering to UC’s requirements.

References:

Organization-Wide Default Settings

To ensure that sales representatives cannot modify virtual container work orders, the most effective approach is to adjust their profile permissions by removing the 'Edit' access for the Work Order object.

Profiles in Salesforce control object-level permissions, determining whether a user can create, read, edit, or delete records of a particular object. By configuring these permissions appropriately, administrators can enforce data security and integrity.

In this scenario, since virtual container work orders are provisioned immediately and should remain unaltered by sales reps, removing the 'Edit' permission ensures that these users have read-only access to the Work Order records. This setup prevents unauthorized modifications while allowing sales reps to view necessary information.

Implementing a sharing rule to change access for all Work Orders to 'Read' (Option A) is not suitable, as sharing rules are designed to open up record access beyond the default sharing settings; they cannot restrict permissions beyond what is defined in profiles or permission sets. Modifying the Record Type/Page Layout assignment (Option B) to make fields read-only affects only the layout and user interface, not the underlying object permissions, and can be bypassed by users with 'Edit' rights.

Therefore, the optimal solution is to adjust the sales representatives' profile by removing their 'Edit' permission on the Work Order object, aligning with best practices for managing object-level security in Salesforce.

For more detailed information on configuring object-level security and profiles, refer to the Salesforce documentation:

When Apex-managed sharing is used to grant access to records, changes to the record owner do not affect the existing shared records if a custom Apex Sharing Reason is created. The sharing reason allows the sharing record to remain independent of the ownership changes, ensuring persistent access for users who were granted visibility through Apex.

Option A: The "With Sharing" keyword only enforces the sharing rules when executing the Apex code but does not ensure persistence of shared access.

Option B: Creating a new manual sharing record directly is not recommended because manual sharing is automatically deleted when ownership changes.

Option C (Correct): A custom Apex Sharing Reason allows the architect to maintain explicit sharing logic, avoiding access loss during ownership changes.

References:

Apex Sharing Reasons

Dynamic Forms: Salesforce Dynamic Forms enable administrators to create field sections that adapt based on device form factors (mobile, desktop, or tablet). This helps align data properly on different devices without requiring custom code.

Why Option C is Correct:

Dynamic Forms allow flexibility to display relevant fields and layouts for different devices without creating separate overrides or custom components.

It adheres to the company’s objective of improving productivity by offering a user-friendly interface across form factors.

Why Others Are Incorrect:

Option A: Custom LWC overrides add unnecessary complexity and require more maintenance.

Option B: Visualforce is outdated for modern Salesforce solutions and not recommended for such use cases.

For more details, refer to the Salesforce documentation on Dynamic Forms: https://help.salesforce.com/

This scenario requires highly specific sharing logic where:

The case is hidden from the subject of the complaint.

The subject’s manager has access.

Apex Managed Sharing provides the precision needed to achieve this requirement. The trigger would identify the agent assigned as the subject of the complaint, lookup their manager, and create a manual sharing rule (via the CaseShare object) granting access to the manager.

Option A (Correct): Apex Managed Sharing allows for granular sharing logic tailored to specific business requirements.

Option B: Criteria-based sharing rules cannot dynamically account for relationships such as "manager of the assigned agent."

Option C: Role Hierarchy sharing doesn’t meet the requirement to hide cases from the agent while allowing their manager to see them.

References:

Apex Managed Sharing for Custom Sharing Logic

Case Sharing Architecture

The organization-wide default (OWD) for Pricebook should be set to Use to allow sales agents to view pricebooks and their products, as well as to select a pricebook when creating Opportunities. The Use access enables users to add products from the pricebook to their opportunities while preventing unauthorized changes to the pricebook or its entries. Setting the OWD to Public Read-Only or View could provide unnecessary access or restrict essential functionality, such as associating products with opportunities. (developer.salesforce.com)

List View Sharing: Salesforce allows list views to be shared with roles, roles and subordinates, public groups, or individual users. To manage visibility of list views for users effectively, sharing with roles and internal subordinates ensures only relevant users within the organizational hierarchy see the list views.

Why Option A is Correct:

Sharing with roles and internal subordinates limits access to users in specific roles and their reporting lines, reducing clutter for irrelevant users.

This method is scalable for organizations with many list views and users.

Why Others Are Incorrect:

Option B: Sharing with individual users is not scalable when there are numerous list views and users.

Option C: Queues are not used to manage list view sharing in this scenario.

For more details, refer to Salesforce documentation on managing list view visibility: https://help.salesforce.com/

Mobile-Specific Customization: Salesforce allows overriding standard actions like “Edit” with custom Lightning components that are conditionally applied for mobile or desktop experiences.

Why Option A is Correct:

Overriding the "Edit" action for the mobile view only allows field consultants to use the image capture functionality without affecting desktop users' experience.

This aligns with the requirement to minimize customization while leveraging reusable Lightning Components.

Why Others Are Incorrect:

Option B: Overriding for all devices and detecting form factors adds unnecessary complexity and could confuse desktop users.

Option C: Adding a separate "Edit in Mobile" button complicates the user interface and training process.

For detailed implementation guidelines, see Salesforce Lightning Component Customization: https://help.salesforce.com/

View All Permission: Assigning the "View All" permission for the Opportunity object allows users to see all records of that object, regardless of sharing rules or ownership. This permission meets the need for key sales reporting team members to view Opportunity data without editing rights.

Why Option C is Correct:

A permission set is the preferred method for granting additional permissions to specific users without altering their profile.

"View All" is more restrictive than "View All Data," providing access only to the Opportunity object and respecting the principle of minimal access.

Why Others Are Incorrect:

Option A: "View All Data" grants access to all objects and violates UC’s privacy principles.

Option B: While a permission set is correct, granting "View All Data" is overly permissive and unnecessary.

For detailed reference, see Salesforce permissions documentation: https://help.salesforce.com/

In Salesforce, the Role Hierarchy grants record access to users higher in the hierarchy. If the operations users are below the operations manager in the Role Hierarchy and the object’s organization-wide default (OWD) is not "Private," the manager will inherit access to records owned by their subordinates. This approach is automatic and does not require additional sharing rules or groups.

Option A: Ownership-based sharing rules are unnecessary if the Role Hierarchy provides the required access.

Option C: Using a Public Group is an unnecessary workaround for this scenario when Role Hierarchy fulfills the requirement.

References:

Role Hierarchy Overview

Even though Mary is Joe's manager in the Role Hierarchy, the lack of Read permission for the Invoice object on Mary’s profile prevents her from viewing Joe’s invoice records. Salesforce enforces object-level permissions, which override sharing rules, OWD settings, and role hierarchy. Without the Read permission on the Invoice object, Mary cannot access the records, even with Public Read-Only OWD or Role Hierarchy privileges.

References:

Role Hierarchy and Object Permissions

Role Hierarchy in Partner Communities:

Salesforce enforces a three-level limit for partner user roles in Partner Communities: Partner Executive → Partner Manager → Partner User. This limitation can restrict the implementation of deeper role hierarchies.

Why Option B is Correct:

The restructuring of the affiliate's internal sales team exceeds the three-level role hierarchy limitation in Partner Communities. This is the main problem that must be addressed.

Why Others Are Incorrect:

Option A: The Channel Manager role is not relevant to the structural limitation of roles in Partner Communities.

Option C: Partner Communities do support role hierarchies, but they are limited to three levels.

For further details, refer to the Salesforce Partner Community Role Hierarchy documentation: https://help.salesforce.com/

Reports saved in the Private Reports folder are only accessible to the user who created them. This folder is meant for personal use, and other users cannot access or view reports saved here, regardless of their permissions.

Why Option A is Correct: Only the report owner can view and run reports saved in the "Private Reports" folder.

Why Others Are Incorrect:

Option B: There is no way to share reports in the "Private Reports" folder with other users.

Option C: Even users with "View All Data" permission cannot access reports in the "Private Reports" folder.

For further details, refer to Salesforce Report and Dashboard Sharing documentation: https://help.salesforce.com/

Site User Visibility Setting:

When "Site User Visibility" is turned off, external users cannot search for or view other external users within the community.

This setting helps maintain privacy and control user visibility.

Why Option B is Correct:

Disabling Site User Visibility directly impacts the ability to search for other external users.

Why Others Are Incorrect:

Option A: Updating their user profile is unrelated to this setting.

Option C: Internal user visibility is not affected by this setting.

For further guidance, see Salesforce Community Sharing Settings documentation: https://help.salesforce.com/

In Salesforce, users must have object-level access (Read permission) to see records shared through sharing rules or any other mechanism. If some users in the public group lack the Read permission for the Account object, they will not be able to see the accounts, even though they are part of the public group with a sharing rule granting access.

Option A (Correct): Lack of object-level permissions for the Account object explains why some users cannot view the shared accounts.

Option B: Page layouts only affect how records are displayed, not record visibility.

Option C: Role Hierarchy does not impact this issue, as it is related to public group sharing.

References:

Object Permissions Overview

The Opportunity Team feature is the most effective way to collaborate on an opportunity in a private sharing model. By adding the product specialist and solution engineer to the Opportunity Team, the junior account manager can share specific permissions for the opportunity without altering ownership. Additionally, Opportunity Team settings remain intact even if the account ownership changes to a senior manager.

Option A: Manual sharing is less flexible and requires re-sharing if the account is reassigned.

Option B: Sharing the account doesn’t ensure access to opportunities since sharing is record-specific in a private model.

Option C (Correct): Opportunity Teams allow role-based collaboration and persistent sharing, ensuring access is unaffected by ownership changes.

References:

Opportunity Team Overview

Sharing Sets in Customer Communities:

Sharing Sets provide a scalable way to grant access to records based on a user's relationship to the record. In this case, the account contact relationship can be used to determine which distributor accounts the part-time agents can access.

Why Option A is Correct:

Sharing Sets are ideal for Community Plus licenses, allowing access to related distributor accounts without needing complex customization.

Agents can access other distributor accounts through their account contact relationship.

Why Others Are Incorrect:

Option B (Apex Sharing): Apex Sharing adds unnecessary complexity for this use case when Sharing Sets are sufficient.

Option C (Sharing Rules): Sharing Rules do not work with the account contact relationship in the context of Community Plus licenses.

For more information, see Salesforce Sharing Sets documentation: https://help.salesforce.com/

Step 1: Remove Read permission on the Driver profile for the Feedback object to ensure that drivers cannot see their feedback records. Object-level permissions control whether users can see, edit, or delete records.

Step 2: Automatically transfer ownership of feedback to the driver's manager upon submission. This ensures that managers own the feedback records, providing a natural ownership hierarchy for data visibility.

Step 3: Leverage the Role Hierarchy to grant access to the manager's superiors, ensuring that visibility extends appropriately up the organizational structure.

Why Option B is Correct: It directly aligns with the requirement that managers (not drivers) need access, and feedback visibility should follow the Role Hierarchy even after a driver’s manager changes.

Why Others Are Incorrect:

Option A: Sharing rules would be redundant in this case since the Role Hierarchy already provides the required access.

Option C: Allowing drivers to retain ownership conflicts with the requirement that they should not have visibility.

For detailed references, see Salesforce Role Hierarchies and Ownership documentation: https://help.salesforce.com/

Sharing List Views with Public Groups:

Public Groups provide a flexible way to share list views with multiple users. Sharing with a Public Group allows administrators to manage access efficiently for specific user groups, such as executives specializing in problematic deals.

Why Option C is Correct:

By creating a Public Group for the specialized executives and sharing the list views with this group, UC ensures that only the intended users can access the views, fulfilling the requirement.

Why Others Are Incorrect:

Option A: Sharing with roles might include unintended users if the role contains non-specialized executives.

Option B: Sharing with individual users is not scalable and would require frequent manual updates.

For more information, refer to Salesforce documentation on Public Groups and List Views: https://help.salesforce.com/