Development-Lifecycle-and-Deployment-Architect Salesforce Certified Development Lifecycle and Deployment Architect (SP23) Question and Answers

: Storing the records in sandboxes and production is not a good practice, as it can lead to data inconsistencies and conflicts. Storing the records in a version control system is a better option, as it allows tracking changes and deploying them to different environments. Using a third-party product to manage these records is also a valid option, as it can provide features such as data backup, restore, and migration.

 The best release strategy for creating a new report to support an urgent client request is to utilize the daily release process. The daily release process is designed for small and quick changes that do not require extensive testing or approval. The daily release process can create the report directly in a full sandbox and then deploy it to production. The major and minor release processes are more suitable for large and complex changes that require more testing and approval. The major and minor release processes should not create the report directly in production, as this may cause errors or conflicts.

The architect should recommend that UC start a citizen development program to minimize additional costs and allow UC to accomplish more from the backlog. A citizen development program is a way of empowering non-technical users to create and deploy simple applications using low-code or no-code tools, such as Salesforce Platform. This can help UC leverage the skills and knowledge of their existing workforce, reduce the workload of the development team, and deliver value faster to the business.

Minor changes should be thoroughly documented and follow some type of standard cadence, as this can help maintain the audit trail and visibility of the changes. All changes should still be tested, even if they are minor, as they can have unexpected impacts on other parts of the system or introduce bugs or security issues. Downstream environments will not be automatically updated when production changes are made, so it is important to have a strategy to keep them in sync and avoid conflicts or overwrites. Minor changes do not need to be documented and can be made at any time is a wrong statement, as it can lead to poor governance and lack of accountability. CI/CD is not required to successfully manage minor changes, although it can help automate and streamline the process. See Application Lifecycle and Deployment for more details.

An agile team is one that improves and evolves its processes and frequently delivers value to the end users. This is the main characteristic of an agile team, as opposed to a traditional team that follows a fixed plan and delivers on predefined dates. Agile teams use various frameworks, such as Scrum, Kanban, and Extreme Programming, but these are not essential to be agile. Agile teams also have shorter iterations, such as biweekly sprints, but these are not the only way to ensure on-time delivery.

Program team and executive sponsors are two user groups that an architect should recommend to join the COE. A program team is a group of people who are responsible for managing and delivering the Salesforce projects and initiatives. They can provide the COE with the technical expertise, best practices, and project management skills. An executive sponsor is a senior leader who supports and advocates for the Salesforce program. They can provide the COE with the strategic direction, business alignment, and funding support.

Designing the right sandbox strategy for the release is a best practice, as it helps to ensure the quality and consistency of the code/configuration across different environments. Regression testing is mandatory for each release, as it helps to verify that the existing functionality is not broken by the new changes. Maintaining a pre/post deployment checklist for each release is a best practice, as it helps to track the tasks and dependencies for each deployment. Release sign-off is not only required for Production, but also for other environments such as UAT and Staging. Publishing a release calendar for each phase of the release is not a best practice, as it may change due to unforeseen circumstances and create confusion.

 A Requirements Traceability Matrix is a document that links requirements to their sources and test cases, as well as the components that implement them. By using this artifact, a developer can easily find the purpose of an Apex class and the requirement it fulfills.

D is the correct answer, as automated testing is the best approach to mitigate the risk of bugs being inadvertently introduced to production. Automated testing can help to ensure that the code meets the quality and functionality standards, as well as detect and prevent any errors or regressions before deploying to production. A is incorrect, as user acceptance testing is not enough to mitigate the risk of bugs, as it depends on the manual testing and feedback of the end users, which can be subjective and incomplete. B is incorrect, as the use of an agile methodology is not directly related to mitigating the risk of bugs, as it is a way of managing the project scope, requirements, and delivery. C is incorrect, as requirements traceability is not directly related to mitigating the risk of bugs, as it is a way of tracking the requirements and their fulfillment. You can learn more about this topic in the Testing Strategies module on Trailhead.

Active Process Builders are configuration items that should be covered by executable tests, as they can have complex logic and actions that affect the behavior and performance of the application. Validation Rules, Workflow Rules, and Case Assignment Rules are also configuration items, but they are simpler and less likely to cause errors or conflicts. Therefore, they can be verified by manual testing or declarative tools.

The most probable reason why none of the sandboxes can be refreshed is that the org has reached the maximum number of active sandboxes allowed by the license. Deleting the full sandbox used for performance testing will free up one sandbox slot and allow the other sandboxes to be refreshed. The Partial Copy sandbox is not the cause of the problem, as it counts as one sandbox slot. Creating a Salesforce support case or contacting the Salesforce Account Team may not resolve the issue in a timely manner.

Utilizing a dedicated developer pro sandbox to address critical bugs and release to production is the recommended release management strategy, as it allows the development team to work on the new project without being interrupted by the bug fixes, and also ensures that the bug fixes are deployed to production as soon as possible. Including fixes for critical bugs in the ongoing development sandboxes is not recommended, as it may delay the release of the bug fixes and also introduce conflicts with the new code. Keeping teams separate until the end of the project and creating a full copy sandbox to merge their work then is not recommended, as it may create a lot of merge conflicts and integration issues. Addressing critical bugs in the development sandboxes and pushing those changes to production separately is not recommended, as it may create inconsistencies between the development and production environments.

 In the Metadata API, the External Object metadata type represents external objects. In the Metadata API, the Custom Object metadata type represents external objects.

The best way to stop the rollbacks from happening is to ensure report metadata is exported daily and that it is merged into the developer branches before the next release. This way, the reports and dashboards will be up to date and consistent across all environments. Using a third-party data warehouse is not a solution, as it does not address the root cause of the rollbacks. Removing the executive’s ability to change reports is not a good practice, as it limits their flexibility and autonomy. Backing up and reimporting the reports before and after the release is not a reliable or scalable solution, as it can introduce errors and inconsistencies.

To track Salesforce metadata throughout the development lifecycle across sandboxes and production, the architect should recommend using an AppExchange or third-party tool that is specialized in Salesforce deployment. These tools can provide features such as version control, dependency analysis, automated testing, and rollback capabilities. Using an Excel sheet to track deployment steps and document the SFDX commands is not a reliable or scalable solution, as it is prone to human errors and does not provide any automation or validation. Using ChangeSet to track deployed customizations is also not a good option, as ChangeSet is limited in the types of metadata it can deploy and does not support versioning or dependency management. Using Salesforce SFDX commands to deploy to different sandboxes is a possible solution, but it requires a high level of technical expertise and does not provide a graphical interface or reporting capabilities.

The only condition that would make continuous integration unsuitable for UC is if their Salesforce instance has only standard functionality, as this would mean that there is no need for code deployment or version control. Option A is not a valid reason, as test scripts can be generated and executed as part of the continuous integration process. Option B is not a valid reason, as a full sandbox is not a requirement for continuous integration, and other types of sandboxes can be used instead. Option D is not a valid reason, as there are free or low-cost software tools available for continuous integration, such as Jenkins, Git, and Ant

The architect should suggest the following actions to help UC discover the failing unit tests earlier: Train the administrators to make their changes in a special “admin changes” sandbox, and then promote to production, and ensure a metadata backup is committed to version control every day and a diff published to the release team. Training the administrators to use a sandbox can help prevent direct changes to production that can break the code or the unit tests. Ensuring a metadata backup and a diff can help identify any changes that have been made to production and compare them with the source of truth.

A and D are the correct answers, as they are the locking behaviors that will occur during a deployment. A is correct, as the production org will be locked and administrators cannot modify metadata during this time, to prevent any conflicts or inconsistencies in the deployment. D is correct, as the production org will be locked and users will still be able to read/write data to the org, to minimize the impact on the business operations and user experience. B is incorrect, as the sandbox org will not be locked and administrators can still modify metadata, as the sandbox org is not the target of the deployment. C is incorrect, as the production org will not be locked and users can only read data during this time, as this would disrupt the business operations and user experience. You can learn more about the locking behaviors in the [Deploy Changes with Change Sets] unit on Trailhead.

The best practice for writing test classes is to not use SeeAllData and generate data in the test methods. This ensures that the test classes are independent of the data in the org and can run successfully in any environment. Creating test data in production or setting SeeAllData to True can cause unexpected failures or data conflicts.

Creating transparency by being honest and clear about timing, planning, and obstacles is one of the Scrum principles, as it helps to build trust and collaboration among the team and the stakeholders. Delivering working software is also a Scrum principle, but it does not mean that the software should not be changed if it is working. Respect is another Scrum principle, but it does not imply that a developer should not test the software, as testing is part of the development process. Embracing change is also a Scrum principle, but it does not mean that the scope should change every day, as that would make it impossible to deliver value and quality.

To reduce deployment time, UC can use the following strategies:

• Use recent deployment validations and the quick deploy feature, which can allow them to skip the validation step in production and deploy the changes faster, if they have already validated the changes in a sandbox within the last four days.
• Specify the test to run by using RunSpecifiedTests test level, which can allow them to run only the tests that are relevant to the components being deployed, instead of running all the tests in the org.

The best practice for moving classes between packages is to set them as deprecated in the source package and recreate them in the target package. This way, the existing subscribers of the source package will not be affected by the change, and the new subscribers of the target package will get the updated classes. Moving the classes directly or changing their names can cause compilation errors and dependency issues.

The problem is that UAT is on a preview release and SIT is not. A preview release is a version of Salesforce that contains the features and enhancements that will be available in the next major release. Preview releases are usually available a few weeks before the official release date, and they are assigned to a subset of instances. If UAT and SIT are on different instances, they may have different release versions, which can cause deployment issues. For example, if UAT has a preview release that contains some new metadata types that are not available in SIT, then deploying those metadata types from SIT to UAT will fail. To avoid this problem, the architect should check the Sandbox Preview Guide1 and the Release Notes2 to see if there are any changes that affect the deployment, and refresh and redeploy the sandboxes accordingly. There is a problem, and it is not expected behavior. Using the DX command line instead will not solve the problem, as it will still encounter the same version mismatch. SIT is not on a preview release and UAT is not, as that would not cause any deployment issues.

Change Sets are a manual way of deploying metadata components between orgs that are affiliated with the same production org. Change Sets cannot be automated, rolled back, or reused between production Salesforce orgs. Change Sets can be validated before deployment, and they can be used for orgs affiliated with the same production org.

To move to the package development model, the administrator must enable both the Dev Hub and the Second-Generation Managed Packages in setup. The Dev Hub is the main org where the administrator can create and manage scratch orgs and packages. The Second-Generation Managed Packages are the new format of packages that support modular development and versioning. The Unlocked Packages are a type of second-generation packages that are not tied to a namespace and can be installed and customized in any org. The Source Tracking for Scratch Orgs is a feature that allows the administrator to track the changes made in a scratch org and push or pull them to or from a source repository.

 Using a Source Control system alongside a multi-sandbox development strategy has several advantages, such as performing code reviews before promoting to a pre-production sandbox, keeping a history of changes made by each developer, and creating a branching strategy that tracks each feature or change separately. Automatically deploying changes from sandbox to production is not an advantage of Source Control, but rather a function of a Continuous Integration tool. Acting as a backup in case of catastrophic data loss is not an advantage of Source Control, but rather a benefit of having a sandbox strategy.

Implementing the change in the sandbox, validating, and releasing to production and considering that the integration with the ERP system may not function as expected are two considerations when addressing the requirement. The change should be performed in the sandbox first, as it is a best practice to test any changes in a non-production environment before deploying them to production. The change may also affect the integration with the ERP system, as it may require updating the mappings, validations, or transformations between the two systems.

These are the correct answers because the project steering committee plays a role in approving deviations from the chosen methodology, when required to address project issues, and setting the criteria for selecting agile or waterfall methodology to be used on internal projects. The steering committee does not design a methodology, but rather chooses one from the existing ones. The steering committee does not enforce that corporate project stage gates are part of the chosen methodology but rather ensures that the chosen methodology aligns with the corporate project stage gates.

The correct way to deploy the artifact to the full sandbox is to authorize to the full sandbox org, validate with sfdx:mdapi:deploy, and on successful validation, deploy with sfdx:mdapi:deploy. This is because the artifact is a .zip file, which is in the metadata API format, and not the source format. Therefore, the sfdx:mdapi:deploy command should be used instead of the sfdx:source:deploy command. See Deploy Metadata Using Metadata API for more details.

The Scrum value that is compromised by this bad practice is courage, because the teams should be transparent about progress and speak up when they need help. Courage is one of the five core values of Scrum, and it means that the team members have the courage to do the right thing and work on tough problems. By not updating the status of their work in progress, the team is hiding potential issues and risks, and not being honest with themselves and others.

Testing load considering 50% more call volume is a reasonable test load consideration, as it can simulate the expected future growth and ensure that the application can handle the increased demand without compromising the performance or functionality.

Creating design standards focused on integration and providing training to all teams is the best way to address the challenges of having various integration patterns and a lack of common understanding of the integration landscape. Design standards can help to establish consistent and best practices for integrating Salesforce with other systems, such as choosing the appropriate integration style, pattern, tool, and protocol. Training can help to educate and align the teams on the design standards and the integration architecture.

Presenting the feature requests at a Center of Excellence meeting and creating the backlog or priority list in a project management tool are two options that can help to get feedback and prioritize the requests. A Center of Excellence meeting can provide a forum for discussing the business value, feasibility, and impact of the requests with the stakeholders. A project management tool can help to track, organize, and prioritize the requests based on the agreed criteria.

 Design standards can help ensure consistency and quality of the code and configuration across multiple project teams. They can also prevent design conflicts and reduce technical debt.

The architect should recommend using Git to create a release branch from the develop branch. All fixes must be made in the release branch. After deployment, merge release with develop. This strategy allows the team to isolate the changes that are ready for deployment from the changes that are still in progress. It also ensures that the fixes are applied to both the release and the develop branches. The other options do not follow the best practices of Git branching and merging.

The correct statement for the Staging sandbox in the diagram is that when created or refreshed, the Staging sandbox is a full replica of Production, as it is a full copy sandbox that copies all the data and metadata from the production org. Option B is not true, as the Staging sandbox is not automatically refreshed, but manually refreshed by the administrator. Option C is not true, as Salesforce major releases may occur in Staging and Production at different times, depending on the sandbox preview window. Option D is not true, as the Staging environment can be updated more frequently than once every two weeks, depending on the sandbox refresh interval.

 Creating design standards to require help text on all custom fields and custom objects is an option that an Architect should recommend, as it helps to provide context and guidance for the administrators and users on how the fields and objects are used and what they mean. Creating design standards to consistently use the description field on custom fields is also an option that an Architect should recommend, as it helps to document the purpose and function of the fields and make them easier to maintain and understand. Creating design standards to consistently use the description field on custom objects is not an option that an Architect should recommend, as it is not a mandatory field and may not provide enough information for the administrators. Creating design standards with a document to store all custom objects and custom fields is not an option that an Architect should recommend, as it may be difficult to keep the document updated and synchronized with the actual metadata in the org. Creating design standards to require all custom fields on all custom object page layouts is not an option that an Architect should recommend, as it may clutter the user interface and reduce the usability and performance of the application.

 Implementing a pull request and secure code review will contribute to an improvement of code security by ensuring that the code is checked and approved by another developer before merging to the main branch. Integrating a static code security analysis tool in the CI/CD process will contribute to an improvement of code security by automatically scanning the code for vulnerabilities and enforcing security standards. Hiring a company specialized in secure code review or using two developers to review and fix current code vulnerabilities are not actions that will improve code security, but rather remediate existing security issues.

The Executive Steering Committee is the management team that is empowered to approve additional budget requirements for a project, as they are responsible for providing strategic direction, oversight, and governance for the project. The Security Review Committee is responsible for ensuring that the project meets the security standards and policies of the organization. The Project Management Committee is responsible for managing the day-to-day activities and deliverables of the project. The Change Control Board is responsible for reviewing and approving any changes to the project scope, schedule, or resources.

The sandbox types that the architect should recommend for batch data testing are Partial Copy sandbox and Full sandbox. These sandbox types allow the testing of large data sets that are similar to the production data. Developer Pro sandbox and Developer sandbox have limited storage and may not be able to accommodate the data needed for the batch data testing.

 A and C are the correct answers, as they are the project situations that favor an agile methodology. An agile methodology is a flexible and iterative approach that can accommodate changing requirements, deliver value quickly, and enable frequent feedback and collaboration. A is correct, as a digitization project to update an existing customer-facing process and enable quick adjustments is a situation that requires an agile methodology, as it involves transforming a legacy system, adapting to customer needs, and delivering incremental improvements. C is correct, as an environment with a heavy investment in DevOps capabilities for rapid testing and deployment is a situation that requires an agile methodology, as it enables continuous integration and delivery, as well as quality assurance and automation. B is incorrect, as a project to be executed by a third party, with a fixed and formal scope, budget, and timeline is a situation that favors a waterfall methodology, as it involves clear and stable requirements, contractual obligations, and sequential phases. D is incorrect, as a project with well-defined requirements and complex interactions between front- and back-end systems is a situation that favors a waterfall methodology, as it involves detailed planning, design, and testing, as well as minimal changes and dependencies. You can learn more about this topic in the Agile Basics module on Trailhead.

The best option for UC is to refresh Stage now, and do not refresh UAT. This way, Stage will be on the preview instance and UAT will not. This will allow UC to test their application on both the current and the next Salesforce version, and ensure that they can release on the current version without any issues. Option B is incorrect because it is not necessary to check the Sandbox Preview Guide or refresh and redeploy to UAT. Option C is incorrect because it is too late to work with support to get on the preview instance after the cutoff dates. Option D is incorrect because it will result in both Stage and UAT being on the same version, which will not allow UC to test their application on the next Salesforce version.

C and D are the correct answers, as they are the best strategies to address a critical production issue occurring in the middle of development. C is correct, as using a source control system to allow separate branches for current development and production bug fixes can help to isolate the changes and avoid conflicts or overwriting. D is correct, as refreshing a sandbox for replication of the issue and testing the use-case scenarios once the code is fixed can help to ensure the quality and functionality of the solution before deploying it to production. A is incorrect, as creating separate branches for current development and production bug fixes and deploying the fix with current development when ready can delay the resolution of the production issue and introduce new risks or errors. B is incorrect, as utilizing one branch for both development and production bug fixes to avoid out-of-sync branches and simplify deployment can create confusion and complexity in the code and make it harder to test and validate. You can learn more about these strategies in the Application Lifecycle and Deployment module on Trailhead.

 The best option for UC given the scenario is to opt for a multi-org strategy, where each org can have its own sales process, common rules, and operate in locale. A multi-org strategy can accommodate the different languages, sales processes, and legal requirements of the two business units. A multi-org strategy can also allow for more innovation and flexibility, as each org can customize and optimize its own functionality. A single-org strategy may not be able to support the different languages, sales processes, and legal requirements of the two business units. A single-org strategy may also limit the innovation and flexibility, as the org has to follow a standardized and consistent approach.

Integrating an agile issue tracker with software testing and continuous integration tools can provide the following benefits:

• Developers can see automated test statuses that commit on a specific user story, which can help them identify and fix any errors or failures quickly.
• Developers can use the committed code’s build status directly on the user story record, which can help them track the progress and quality of their work.

 The change set performance may depend on the included components, especially if they are complex or have many dependencies. The change set may take more time than usual if it includes changes to permission sets and profiles, as these components require additional validation and processing. The change set may not take more time if it includes field type changes, new custom objects and fields, or other simple components.

The Service Cloud developer will see the conflict and need to resolve it when they create a pull request from ServiceCase to UCDev in GitHub. A pull request is a way of proposing changes to a branch and requesting a review and merge from another branch. GitHub will show any conflicts that prevent the pull request from being merged automatically, and the developer will need to resolve them manually before the merge can happen.

Manually validating change sets before deployment is a recommended practice to avoid possible delays while deploying a change set, as it can help you identify and resolve any errors or dependencies before the actual deployment. Change set performance is not independent of included components, as some components may take longer to deploy than others. Manually creating new custom objects and new custom fields or manually applying the field type changes are not advisable, as they can introduce human errors and inconsistencies between environments. See Deploy Changes with Change Sets for more details.

The fastest approach to spin off a sandbox with up to 10,000 records in each object for testing the integration performance is to spin off a partial copy sandbox using a sandbox template with all the objects required for testing the integration. A partial copy sandbox can copy up to 10,000 records per object using a sandbox template that specifies the objects and fields to copy. A partial copy sandbox can also copy the metadata and the configuration settings from the production org. A developer pro sandbox, a development sandbox, or a full copy sandbox may not be able to copy enough data for testing the integration performance, as they have lower data storage limits. A developer pro sandbox and a development sandbox can only copy 1 GB of data, while a full copy sandbox can only copy 5 GB of data. A full copy sandbox may also take longer to spin-off, as it copies all the data and metadata from the production org.

To delete metadata with a deploy() call, two things are needed: a package.xml file and a destructiveChanges.xml file. The package.xml file specifies the API version and the components to be deployed, while the destructiveChanges.xml file specifies the components to be deleted. The API version does not have to be the current one, as long as it is compatible with the components. The purgeOnDelete option is not required, as it only determines whether the deleted components are stored in the recycle bin or not.

 Using a Developer Edition org to stage changes to their Customer Community poses the following risks:

• Developer Edition orgs have limited user counts and low data volume limits, which will make User Testing difficult, as the testing environment will not be representative of the production environment.
• Developer Edition orgs cannot have sandboxes, which will make team development difficult, as the developers will not be able to work in isolated environments and test their changes before merging them.
• Changes Sets cannot be used to deploy from Developer Edition to Production, which will make deployment more complex, as the developers will have to use other tools such as Ant Migration Tool or SFDX CLI to deploy their changes.

The first step in establishing a governance framework is to identify the relevant stakeholders from within the organization to obtain their goals and objectives. This will help to define the scope, roles, responsibilities, and processes for managing the Salesforce initiatives. The other options are possible steps to take later, but not the first one.

 Refreshing a Partial Copy sandbox every weekend and including an appropriate sandbox template will allow UC to train the users on samples of production data and delete all the data generated during the training session at the end of the week. Loading data using data loader is not necessary if the sandbox template includes the relevant data. Developer Pro sandboxes have limited storage and may not be able to accommodate the data needed for the training.

The responsibility of the Technical Architect within a Change Control Board meeting is to approve the upcoming release for deployment into production, as they are the ones who have the authority and expertise to evaluate the quality and readiness of the release2. Option A is not correct, as prioritizing the Salesforce product roadmap with business stakeholders is not a task that is done in a Change Control Board meeting, but rather in a strategic planning session. Option B is not correct, as conducting code reviews for projects in the development phase is not a task that is done in a Change Control Board meeting, but rather in a code review session. Option C is not correct, as troubleshooting deployment errors that occurred during the last release is not a task that is done in a Change Control Board meeting, but rather in a post-deployment review session.

 B and D are the correct answers, as Force.com IDE and Force.com Migration Tool are the deployment tools that will support the request of creating a new custom object to track Shipping Containers and making it available globally by all Salesforce instances and further maintained and modified regionally by local administrators. Force.com IDE and Force.com Migration Tool are both tools that use the Metadata API to retrieve and deploy metadata components, such as custom objects, from one org to another. They also allow for selective deployment, meaning that only the components that are needed can be deployed, without affecting the rest of the org. A is incorrect, as Tooling API is not a deployment tool, but an API that provides access to metadata and code, as well as customizing and automating the development process. C is incorrect, as Change sets are not a deployment tool that will support the request, as they are limited to deploying components between connected orgs, and do not allow for selective deployment or regional modifications. You can learn more about these tools in the Deploy Changes with the Force.com Migration Tool and Deploy Changes with the Force.com IDE units on Trailhead.

The best deployment strategy for UC to use in this environment is to refresh the developer’s sandbox, develop changes, refresh the common sandbox, deploy to the common sandbox, test changes, as this will ensure that the developer’s sandbox has the latest production data and metadata, and that the common sandbox has the latest production data and metadata as well as the developer’s changes, before testing and deploying to production. Option B is not correct, as refreshing the developer’s sandbox after testing the changes will erase the changes and make them unavailable for deployment to the common sandbox. Option C is not correct, as refreshing the developer’s sandbox after developing the changes will erase the changes and make them unavailable for deployment to the common sandbox. Option D is not correct, as refreshing the common sandbox before developing the changes will make the common sandbox out of sync with the production data and metadata.

The best strategy to delete the day’s test data in a partial copy sandbox every night is to execute a batch job that deletes all records created on the day. This way, you can automate the process of cleaning up the test data and avoid manual work. Manually deleting all records individually is time-consuming and error-prone. Creating a new developer copy sandbox every night is unnecessary and wasteful, as developer copy sandboxes have limited storage and functionality. Refreshing the sandbox every night is also not feasible, as partial copy sandboxes have a refresh interval of 5 days.

 A and B are the best techniques to ensure a smooth and timely deployment, as they ensure that the code is consistent, version-controlled, and validated against the target environment. C is not a good technique, as it creates an unnecessary sandbox that does not reflect the production environment. D is not a good technique, as it does not allow for testing and validation before deploying to production.

Facilitating the design of a prioritization model with the stakeholders is the best way to overcome the problem of having many backlog items and competing stakeholders who cannot agree on priority. A prioritization model is a framework that helps the stakeholders evaluate and rank the backlog items based on various criteria, such as value, urgency, effort, risk, etc. By using a prioritization model, the stakeholders can have a clear and objective way of deciding which items are more important and should be done first. Organizing a sprint planning meeting, taking over prioritization, or allowing the delivery teams to pick the work are not effective solutions, as they do not address the root cause of the problem or involve the stakeholders in the decision-making process.

Using static code analysis to enforce coding standards is the best way to improve consistency among the development teams working on different projects. Static code analysis is a tool that can automatically scan the code and detect any violations of the predefined coding rules and best practices. It can also provide feedback and suggestions to the developers on how to improve their code quality and readability. Creating a Center of Excellence for release management, requiring pull requests to be reviewed by two developers before merging, or executing regression testing before code can be committed are also good practices, but they are not as effective or efficient as static code analysis for ensuring coding consistency.

The usual symptoms of inadequate negative tests are the ones that indicate that the code is not handling the possible errors or exceptions that may occur in different scenarios. For example, when an Apex batch job runs at a scheduled time, an increased number of Apex execution errors occur over all1, this means that the code is not handling the possible concurrency issues, governor limits, or data quality issues that may arise when the job runs. Similarly, when an Apex process runs into an un-handled exception when an HTTP callout has an unexpected status code in the response body1, this means that the code is not handling the possible network issues, authentication issues, or API errors that may occur when making the callout. Another symptom is when developers constantly ask the testers for a screenshot of the error and the exact steps of reproducing the error1, this means that the code is not logging the error details or providing meaningful error messages to the users. Option A is incorrect because turning to the debug log for details of the failed Apex executions is not a symptom of inadequate negative tests, but a normal practice of debugging the code. Option E is incorrect because the delivered user interfaces are not meeting the expectations of the business users is not a symptom of inadequate negative tests, but a symptom of poor user interface design or incomplete requirements.

 To reduce defects, the architect should recommend increasing the code coverage to 95% and adding more details to the acceptance criteria. Increasing the code coverage can help ensure that the code is thoroughly tested and meets the quality standards. Adding more details to the acceptance criteria can help clarify the requirements and expectations for the functionality. Using the test script to define the test classes or having the test analyst create the test classes are not good practices, as they can introduce errors and inconsistencies in the testing process.