Deal of The Day! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions
Mail Us support@pass4success.com
Location US
Mob_nav_barsMENU

ServiceNow CIS-SAM Exam - Topic 1 Question 56 Discussion

Risk is configured by default, to calculate Risk = High for a change that is scheduled with only 3 days lead time. Your customer's change policy requires that changes be requested with 5 days lead time.How would you satisfy this requirement?
C) Update the Calculate Risk UI Action
A) Update the Risk Property for Insufficient lead time
B) Update the Risk Assessment Matrix for Insufficient lead time
D) Update the Risk Matrix for insufficient lead time
E) Update the Risk Condition for Insufficient lead time

ServiceNow CIS-SAM Exam - Topic 1 Question 56 Discussion

Actual exam question for ServiceNow's CIS-SAM exam
Question #: 56
Topic #: 1
[All CIS-SAM Questions]

Risk is configured by default, to calculate Risk = High for a change that is scheduled with only 3 days lead time. Your customer's change policy requires that changes be requested with 5 days lead time.

How would you satisfy this requirement?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: C

by Jacqueline at Oct 17, 2023, 04:29 PM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium CIS-SAM Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Submit Cancel
Juliana
6 months ago
I’m not sure about that, isn’t the Risk Condition more relevant here?
upvoted 0 times
...
Dana
7 months ago
Wait, can you really just change the UI Action like that?
upvoted 0 times
...
Gracie
7 months ago
Definitely agree with option C, it's the most direct approach.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ilene
7 months ago
I think updating the Risk Assessment Matrix makes more sense.
upvoted 0 times
...
Danica
7 months ago
Sounds like a simple fix, just update the Risk Property.
upvoted 0 times
...
Josefa
8 months ago
I definitely recall that the Risk Matrix plays a role in how risks are assessed, so maybe updating that is the way to go.
upvoted 0 times
...
Vincenza
8 months ago
I’m a bit confused about whether we should change the Risk Property or the Risk Condition. They seem similar, right?
upvoted 0 times
...
Laquita
8 months ago
I remember a practice question about lead times, and I feel like updating the Calculate Risk UI Action could be relevant here.
upvoted 0 times
...
Filiberto
8 months ago
I think we might need to update the Risk Assessment Matrix, but I'm not entirely sure if that's the right approach.
upvoted 0 times
...
Sabrina
8 months ago
I'm a little confused - is it really just about updating the Risk Property, or do we need to look at the Risk Matrix or Risk Condition as well? I want to make sure I fully understand the requirements before answering.
upvoted 0 times
...
Andra
8 months ago
I'm pretty confident the answer is to update the Risk Assessment Matrix for Insufficient lead time. That seems like the most direct way to satisfy the 5-day requirement.
upvoted 0 times
...
Mauricio
8 months ago
Okay, let me think this through. The question says the customer's policy requires 5 days lead time, but the default is 3 days. So I'd guess we need to update something related to the lead time requirement, like the Risk Assessment Matrix or the Risk Condition.
upvoted 0 times
...
Mona
8 months ago
Hmm, I'm a bit unsure here. Is it really just about updating the Risk Property, or could there be other changes needed to the Risk Assessment Matrix or Risk Condition?
upvoted 0 times
...
Tambra
8 months ago
This seems straightforward - I think updating the Risk Property for Insufficient lead time is the way to go.
upvoted 0 times
...
Mona
8 months ago
I'm pretty confident I can identify the key differences between shutdown and init based on the options provided. Let me think this through carefully.
upvoted 0 times
...
Clay
8 months ago
This seems like a straightforward question about the impact of cost of capital on project evaluation metrics. I'll need to think through the relationships between these measures.
upvoted 0 times
...
Kanisha
9 months ago
I'm leaning towards the idea that we can just rename locations directly in the report, but I think we practiced editing them elsewhere too.
upvoted 0 times
...
Miles
9 months ago
Hmm, I keep mixing up the layers. Is the Network Services Orchestrator more about customer-facing or resource-facing services? I think it's A, but I need to think more about the other option.
upvoted 0 times
...
Carylon
1 year ago
I'd say the answer is C - update the 'Calculate Risk UI Action' to just say 'Approve anyway, what could go wrong?'
upvoted 0 times
Aide
11 months ago
Definitely, it would streamline the process and ensure compliance with the customer's change policy.
upvoted 0 times
...
Roxanne
12 months ago
Agreed, updating the Calculate Risk UI Action seems like the most direct solution.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jesusita
12 months ago
I think C is the best option. It would make the process smoother.
upvoted 0 times
...
Isreal
12 months ago
E) Update the Risk Condition for Insufficient lead time
upvoted 0 times
...
Melissa
12 months ago
D) Update the Risk Matrix for insufficient lead time
upvoted 0 times
...
Willow
12 months ago
C) Update the Calculate Risk UI Action
upvoted 0 times
...
Louisa
1 year ago
B) Update the Risk Assessment Matrix for Insufficient lead time
upvoted 0 times
...
Titus
1 year ago
A) Update the Risk Property for Insufficient lead time
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Delbert
1 year ago
A is the way to go. It's the simplest and most direct solution to update the Risk Property for Insufficient lead time.
upvoted 0 times
Stacey
1 year ago
D) Update the Risk Matrix for insufficient lead time
upvoted 0 times
...
Sabina
1 year ago
Great idea! That would definitely help meet the customer's change policy.
upvoted 0 times
...
Tracey
1 year ago
A) Update the Risk Property for Insufficient lead time
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Lezlie
1 year ago
E all the way! Updating the Risk Condition for Insufficient lead time is the clear winner in my opinion.
upvoted 0 times
...
Britt
1 year ago
I'm not sure, but I think updating the Risk Matrix for insufficient lead time could also work. What do you guys think?
upvoted 0 times
...
Ashleigh
1 year ago
I agree with Curt. Updating the Risk Property makes the most sense to satisfy the requirement.
upvoted 0 times
...
Tiera
1 year ago
D is my pick. Updating the Risk Matrix for insufficient lead time seems like the most logical solution here.
upvoted 0 times
Myong
1 year ago
Yes, that would align with the customer's change policy and ensure the correct risk level is calculated.
upvoted 0 times
...
Phung
1 year ago
I agree, updating the Risk Matrix for insufficient lead time is the best option.
upvoted 0 times
...
Galen
1 year ago
Yes, that would align with the customer's change policy and ensure the correct risk level is calculated.
upvoted 0 times
...
Casie
1 year ago
I agree, updating the Risk Matrix for insufficient lead time is the best option.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Sueann
1 year ago
I think option B is the way to go. Updating the Risk Assessment Matrix seems like the most straightforward approach to address the lead time requirement.
upvoted 0 times
Rozella
1 year ago
Option B seems like the most direct way to address the lead time issue and align with the customer's policy.
upvoted 0 times
...
Alaine
1 year ago
Updating the Risk Assessment Matrix is a clear solution to meet the 5 days lead time requirement.
upvoted 0 times
...
Thomasena
1 year ago
I think option B is the best choice to ensure changes are requested with sufficient lead time.
upvoted 0 times
...
King
1 year ago
I agree, updating the Risk Assessment Matrix would align with the customer's change policy.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Curt
1 year ago
I think the answer is A) Update the Risk Property for Insufficient lead time.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel