SAP C_THR81 Exam Syllabus Topics:

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

Question #1
<strong>CHALLENGE 4 &#x2014; Position Change Routing for Regional Review</strong> The implementation partner needs readiness evidence for whether position-change workflow can support policy renewal staffing scenarios. Some affected requests remain with HR operations, while similar claims requests route correctly.
Which evidence best supports a controlled readiness recommendation?
Response:

A. HR operations can approve every pending request before the readiness summary is submitted.
B. The team can manually list which underwriting requests are still pending with HR operations.
C. Representative position-change tests show that routing follows regional responsibility when employee and position context align.
D. Regional managers receive notification emails for some successful claims position changes.

Question #2
A consultant is testing a workflow for manager-submitted temporary supervisory coverage changes 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 support population, requests that include both a temporary end date and a position-linked approval impact bypass the intended control review and go straight to the final approval stage.
Existing populations with the same combination still pass through control review. The customer wants to keep the shared workflow model because separate population-specific workflows would increase post-go-live maintenance. The consultant must correct the routing behavior without redesigning the wider approval process.
What is the best corrective action?
Response:

A. Ask managers in the new support population to stop using temporary supervisory coverage requests until the workflow model is revised later.
B. Review the routing condition or rule precedence for the new population, then correct the logic for requests combining temporary end date with position-linked approval impact.
C. Add the control reviewers directly to the final approval stage so affected requests still receive some oversight before completion.
D. Create a separate workflow for the new support population so the control review is always included for those requests.

Question #3
A consultant is supporting a scheduled administrative update to position attributes in a public cloud SAP SuccessFactors Employee Central and Position Management tenant. The import file is accepted, but a subset of rows fails because the records reference position codes that already exist with different effective timing than expected by the update plan.
The customer needs the changes loaded before a workforce review, but they do not want the consultant to overwrite valid historical information or remove existing timeline control from the position records. The failed rows are all related to changes that should begin next period rather than immediately. The consultant must choose a correction that preserves data history and future processing accuracy.
Which action should the consultant take first?
Response:

A. Remove future-dated timing information from the file and load all changes as immediate updates to ensure the workforce review uses current values.
B. Review the effective timing used in the import data and align the failed position updates with the correct future-dated record handling before reprocessing the affected rows.
C. Delete the current position records for the failed rows so the import can recreate them cleanly with the new values.
D. Split the file by region and rerun it under a higher-access administrative account so the existing position codes can be updated more forcefully.

Question #4
In a public cloud SAP SuccessFactors Employee Central and Position Management project, a consultant is validating a process where a position status change should update downstream employee planning readiness before a workforce review. In the web-based UI, HR specialists change several positions to a reserved state and save successfully. The new state is visible on the position records, but for positions in one newly introduced hierarchy segment the linked employee planning readiness flag does not update during validation.
Other hierarchy segments behave correctly. The customer wants to preserve position-driven administration and avoid separate employee-side maintenance after each position update. The affected records all belong to a segment added during the latest configuration cycle, and the consultant must correct the issue without redesigning the broader readiness process.
What is the best first action?
Response:

A. Ask HR specialists to update the employee planning readiness flag manually for the new hierarchy segment until validation is complete.
B. Recreate the affected positions under an older hierarchy segment so the downstream update behavior matches earlier records.
C. Give planners broader edit access to the employee planning readiness field so they can correct the missing updates directly after each position save.
D. Review the dependency between the new hierarchy segment and downstream readiness propagation, then correct the configuration or binding controlling the linked employee update.

Question #5
<strong>CHALLENGE 3 &#x2014; Terminal Manager Access for Operational Boundaries</strong> A terminal manager can access employees in one assigned dockside work area but cannot view a maintenance position that belongs to their terminal responsibility. Another unassigned customs-office position appears in their review list.
What should the consultant validate first?
Response:

A. Whether the permission role, target population, and terminal responsibility assignment align for both assigned and unassigned records.
B. Whether the terminal manager should be given access to all records until the maintenance position list is corrected.
C. Whether HR data administration can review the maintenance position instead of the terminal manager during design validation.
D. Whether the employee creation import should be reloaded before any access testing continues.

Solutions: