SAP Certified - SAP S/4HANA Cloud Private Edition, Sourcing and Procurement 認定 C_TS452 試験問題:

1. A project team is validating strategic sourcing in SAP S/4HANA Cloud Private Edition for a business unit that is moving supplier negotiations out of spreadsheets and into standard system processes. Contract records were created and released in the test cycle, and buyers can view them in the web UI. However, when a purchaser creates a purchase order for materials that should be covered by an active contract, the system does not propose the contract as expected. The buyer can still finish the purchase order manually, so transaction execution is not completely blocked.
The deployment lead has imposed a constraint: the team must preserve standard contract-driven sourcing behavior, avoid manual workarounds for cutover rehearsal, and remain within clean core rules because the next transport wave already includes automated test scripts.
What should the consultant check first to resolve the upstream issue?

A) Ask buyers to reference the contract manually on each purchase order until the sourcing wave is completed.
B) Delay contract-based sourcing validation because manual PO completion proves the current setup is functionally sufficient.
C) Reconfigure purchase order output settings because contract proposal issues usually originate in document communication controls.
D) Verify whether the contract, supplier, material, and organizational assignments are valid and active for source determination in the tested scope.

2. A commercial refrigeration distributor is onboarding a newly centralized purchasing office into SAP S/4HANA Cloud Private Edition after shutting down a regional procurement spreadsheet. Supplier records, material masters, and standard purchasing data have been migrated successfully. Requesters can create requisitions, and buyers can convert most of them into purchase orders without issue. However, for one family of refrigerant cylinders, the system consistently proposes a fallback supplier instead of the intended fixed supplier for the new office.
In an already stabilized purchasing office using the same shared model, the fixed supplier is proposed correctly for similar materials. The rollout lead wants the issue corrected before the regional spreadsheet is fully retired. Buyers must not override the supplier manually, and no custom forcing rule may be introduced because the same onboarding template will be reused for future offices.
What should the consultant check first?

A) Ask buyers to continue using the fallback supplier until the new office completes its first operational cycle.
B) Verify whether the new purchasing office has the required organizational and master-data assignments for the intended fixed-supplier participation in standard source determination.
C) Add a temporary rule that forces the fixed supplier for refrigerant cylinders until the rollout is complete.
D) Recreate the purchase requisitions because wrong supplier proposals usually begin with requester-side entry inconsistency.

3. <strong>CHALLENGE 1 &#x2014; Source Eligibility Control for Shared Regulated Materials</strong> During retesting, the team finds that one regulated excipient behaves correctly only after they align source-list behavior, supplier eligibility assumptions, and procurement-relevant material settings together. When only one of those areas is corrected, the visible document path improves, but source behavior still drifts later. What is the strongest interpretation?

A) The issue reflects a multi-layer dependency in which source control depends on aligned setup across more than one upstream preparation area
B) The sourcing issue was mainly a user-training problem because the documents could already be created
C) The issue is downstream only, so invoice validation should be repeated before any sourcing setup is changed
D) The issue is minor because local supplier substitution can absorb the remaining variance without affecting template promotion

4. A facilities-equipment company is validating automatic conversion of approved purchase requisitions into standard purchase orders in SAP S/4HANA Cloud Private Edition for a newly introduced spare-parts category. Requesters can create requisitions in SAP Fiori, and approval completes successfully for all test cases. For most material categories, buyers can continue directly into purchase-order creation. However, for the new spare-parts category, the approved requisitions remain selectable but fail at conversion because the downstream document cannot complete the required item-processing state.
The same buyers can convert comparable requisitions for another category in the same purchasing organization without issue. The rollout lead wants the issue corrected before the next regression cycle. Buyers must not use manual workaround document types, and the solution must remain standard and reusable for future category activation.
What should the consultant check first?

A) Broaden buyer authorization so the blocked conversion can bypass the missing item-processing state.
B) Rebuild requisition approval because approved demand should always transition into a convertible purchase-order state.
C) Ask buyers to create manual alternative purchase orders for the spare-parts category until testing is complete.
D) Verify whether the affected spare-parts category is correctly linked to the downstream item-processing and purchasing document determination settings.

5. A spare-parts business is introducing standard replenishment planning in SAP S/4HANA Cloud Private Edition while gradually retiring a legacy planning spreadsheet used by regional planners. Initial planning runs now generate proposals for most stock items, and downstream purchasing tests are progressing. However, one regional planner reports that materials transferred from the legacy spreadsheet process into the new planning scope are still excluded from replenishment proposals, even though current stock levels and recent consumption would normally justify planning output.
Other materials created directly in the new model are processed correctly. The program manager wants the issue fixed before the spreadsheet is formally retired. No custom planning logic may be introduced, and the correction must support a controlled modernization path for later regional adoption.
What should the consultant check first?

A) Ask planners to continue entering manual replenishment requests for transferred materials until all regions abandon the spreadsheet.
B) Verify whether the transferred materials carry the planning-relevant master-data settings and scope assignments required for standard proposal generation.
C) Rebuild the purchasing source assignments because replenishment gaps usually originate in supplier-selection logic.
D) Increase the overall planning run frequency so transferred materials are recalculated more often than newly created materials.

質問と回答：