Explanation:

Why this fits best:
The bundle is pre-approved, so reps shouldn’t need to submit a discount for approval when they sell that specific offer. The clean Salesforce way to do this—without dismantling your current discount governance—is to publish the bundle at the approved promotional price and make it available through a separate price book (e.g., “Promo – Q4 Bundles”).
Reps then add the promo product at its list price from that promo price book, so they aren’t “discounting” anything—the price is already approved. Your existing approval process for other discounted deals stays intact. Salesforce’s official docs recommend using custom price books to offer different prices to different segments/uses, which is exactly this scenario.

Why not the others:
B. Implement CPQ — CPQ is powerful for complex bundles, rules, and advanced discounting, but it’s heavy if your need is simply a temporary, pre-approved bundle price. You can meet the requirement with standard Products & Price Books—no CPQ required. (CPQ “bundles” are a CPQ feature, but not needed here.) Salesforce
C. Remove the approval process — That would remove governance for all discounts, not just this one promotion. Salesforce’s own examples show approvals tied to discount thresholds—keep those for non-promo deals.
D. Enable Subscriptions — Subscriptions relate to recurring products/billing, not one-time promo bundles or discount approvals. It doesn’t address the requirement. (No official guidance connects “subscriptions” to bypassing discount approvals.)

Quick implementation sketch
Create a Product for the Bundle – Monitor + Keyboard (or keep components separate but price the bundle as a single product for simplicity).
Create a custom Price Book called something like Promo – Q4 Bundles. Add the bundle product with the pre-approved price.
Share/assign that price book to the appropriate users/teams; instruct reps to select from this price book when selling the promo.
Keep your discount approval process for any non-promo discounts on other products/opportunities.

Bonus tips (to keep you out of trouble)
Name it clearly. Give the promo price book and product names that make it obvious they’re pre-approved, so reps don’t try to apply additional discounts. Salesforce
Sunset the promo. When the deal ends, deactivate the price book entry or unshare the promo price book.
Reports & guardrails. Add a simple report on opportunities using the promo price book to track adoption; keep the approval process active for everything else (e.g., “>15% requires manager” as per Salesforce’s own examples). Trailhead

Bottom line:
Publish the bundle at its approved price via a separate price book, so reps can sell it without triggering discount approvals—while your normal discount approval process continues to govern everything else.

Explanation:

Why:
Delegated Administration lets you choose a trusted “backup” user (or group) who can assign specific permission sets to users without giving them full setup rights. You control exactly which roles/users they can manage and which permission sets they’re allowed to assign. Crucially, delegated admins cannot create or edit permission sets unless you separately grant them powerful setup permissions—so this cleanly meets “can assign, but cannot create/modify.”

Why not the others:
A. Assignment Rules – These route Leads/Cases; they have nothing to do with permission set assignment.
C. View All Users – Only allows viewing user records; it doesn’t allow assigning permission sets.
D. Customize Application – A broad setup permission that enables creating/modifying many metadata items (too much access) and still doesn’t target “assign but not create/modify permission sets” as neatly as Delegated Admin.

How to set it up (high level):
Setup → Delegated Administration → New → pick the backup resource → specify Roles/Subordinates they can manage and Permission Sets they can assign.

Explanation:

In a matrix or summary report grouped by Country (outer/parent group) and Lead Source (inner/child group), the varying lead volumes per country make raw counts misleading for effectiveness. The PARENTGROUPVAL function enables relative calculations (e.g., percentage of leads from each source within a country) by referencing aggregates from the parent group (Country total).

To configure:

Edit the report > Add Formula > Summary Formula.
Column Name: "Source Effectiveness %".
Formula: RowCount / PARENTGROUPVAL(RowCount, GRAND_SUMMARY, Country) * 100 (this divides the Lead Source row count by the Country total, yielding %; adjust for other metrics like Amount).
Format: Percentage, 2 decimals.
Display: At the "Summary" level to show per Lead Source row under each Country.
Save and run: The report now displays normalized effectiveness (e.g., under "USA": Web = 40%, Email = 30%), highlighting top sources regardless of country size.

This provides actionable insights for the VP, like prioritizing sources in low-volume countries.

Why Not the Other Options?

A. The 'Show Unique Count':
This option (in summary fields) deduplicates records (e.g., counts unique Leads), useful for avoiding inflated totals but doesn't compute ratios or effectiveness across groups.
C. Bucket filters:
Buckets create ad-hoc groupings (e.g., binning Lead Sources into "Digital" vs. "Offline"), which reorganizes data but doesn't perform calculations like percentages relative to parents.
D. PREVGROUPVAL function:
This compares a value to the prior row in the same grouping level (e.g., Lead Source variance from previous Source), ideal for trends like MoM changes but not for hierarchical ratios against a parent (Country).

References
Salesforce Help: Summary Formula Functions – Examples of PARENTGROUPVAL for group percentages.
Salesforce Help: Build Reports with Formulas – Step-by-step for effectiveness metrics.
Trailhead Module: Advanced Reporting – Hands-on with PARENTGROUPVAL in grouped reports.

Explanation:

Because the account is owned by a user in the Galaxy Manager role (higher in the hierarchy), users in the Galaxy Subordinate role (lower) do not inherit access to the manager’s records via the role hierarchy—access flows upward, not downward or across.

If only one of the two subordinates can see the account, the typical reason is that the owner (or someone with sufficient rights) manually shared that specific account with that one user. Manual sharing grants record-level access to selected users/roles/groups on a one-off basis, which explains why the other subordinate (same role, same profile) cannot see it.

Not A (Workflow Rule): Workflows don’t grant record access; they automate field updates, emails, tasks, etc.
Not C (Queues): Accounts aren’t owned by queues (queues are for objects like Cases/Leads/custom objects that are queue-enabled).
Not D (Role Hierarchy): Would have given managers access to subordinates’ records, not the other way around.

So the discrepancy arises from Manual Sharing to just one of the sub-role users.

Explanation:

The "Apex CPU time limit exceeded" error indicates that an Apex trigger, class, or other server-side code is consuming too much CPU time during execution (Salesforce enforces a 10-second synchronous limit or 60-second asynchronous limit per transaction). Since this issue is intermittent—occurring only on specific opportunity records and for certain users—the root cause is likely tied to data-specific logic (e.g., complex queries, loops, or integrations triggered by those records) rather than a global configuration problem.

To identify the cause:
Reproduce the issue: Have affected users attempt to close the problematic opportunities while logging is enabled.
Enable Debug Logs: In Setup, go to "Debug Logs" and set up a trace flag for the affected users (or the running user if it's a system context). Set the log level to "FINEST" for Apex Code to capture detailed execution traces, including CPU timestamps, SOQL queries, and method calls.
Review the Logs: After the error occurs, download the log from the Debug Logs page or Event Log Files. Use tools like the Developer Console's Log Inspector or checkpoints to analyze CPU usage breakdowns. Look for long-running loops, inefficient SOQL (e.g., in triggers), or recursive triggers firing on opportunity updates.
Narrow it Down: Since it's record/user-specific, filter logs by the opportunity ID or user session to isolate patterns (e.g., custom fields or related records causing high computation).
This method provides granular, runtime visibility into Apex performance without broadly impacting the org.

Why Not the Other Options?
A. Monitor with Login Forensics: This tool (in Setup > Security > Login Forensics) tracks login attempts and security events, not Apex execution or CPU usage during record updates.
C. Review the Setup Audit Trail: This logs metadata changes (e.g., who modified a trigger), useful for auditing deployments but not for diagnosing live runtime errors like CPU limits.
D. Set up Apex Exception Email alerts: This notifies stakeholders of exceptions via email (configured in Custom Settings > Apex Email Settings), but it only reports the error after it happens—without details on why the CPU limit was hit. It's reactive, not diagnostic.

References
Salesforce Help: Debug Logs and Trace Flags – Official guide on setting up and analyzing logs for Apex issues.
Trailhead Module: Apex Debugging – Hands-on tutorial for troubleshooting CPU limits.
Best Practice: For CPU optimization, review Apex Governor Limits to ensure code stays under the 10-second threshold. If needed, refactor with Bulkification or async processing (e.g., Queueable Apex).