Summary:
In Salesforce Revenue Cloud, proration ensures that customers are billed proportionally for partial subscription periods. When subscriptions start or end mid-period, a proration multiplier is applied to the standard price to calculate the charge for that partial period. Using the proration settings, such as aligning to the calendar and allowing partial periods, the system calculates the multiplier based on the number of days the subscription is active relative to the total days in the billing period.

Correct Option:

A — Proration Multiplier = Number of remaining days in March / Total number of days in March
This is correct because the subscription starts on March 20. The proration multiplier is based on the remaining days in March (March 20–31) relative to the total number of days in March (31 days). This ensures the customer is only billed for the portion of the month during which the subscription is active.

Incorrect Options:

B — Number of days used in March / Total number of days in March
This is incorrect because it calculates the multiplier based on days already passed rather than the remaining days for the billing period, which would undercharge the customer for the partial period.

C — Number of days used in a year / Total number of days in a year
This is incorrect because proration is calculated per billing period, not annually. Using annual days would misalign the charge for the partial month.

Reference:
Salesforce Revenue Cloud Documentation → Subscription Proration, Proration Multiplier Calculation, Align to Calendar Settings.

Summary:
The requirement is to stop a specific delinquent customer from being invoiced, not to stop the entire billing system or manually delete individual invoices. The standard, supported method for this in Revenue Cloud is to suspend billing for that customer's account. This action halts the generation of future invoices for the account while preserving the existing billing schedule data and history. This is an administrative function that requires the appropriate permissions.

Correct Option:

C: Assign themselves the Billing Administrator permission set, go to the customer’s account, and use the Suspend Billing button.
This is the correct and out-of-the-box method. The Suspend Billing action is a specific feature available on the Account object.

A user with the Billing Administrator permission set can access this button. When clicked, it prevents any future invoice runs from generating invoices for that specific account, effectively stopping the billing process for the delinquent customer as required.

Incorrect Option:

A: Assign themselves the Billing Administrator permission set, navigate to Scheduled Jobs, and delete the invoice scheduler’s scheduled jobs.
This is a drastic and incorrect action. Deleting the scheduled jobs for the invoice scheduler would stop billing for all customers, not just the delinquent one. This would severely disrupt business operations and is not a targeted solution.

B: Assign themselves the Billing Operations User permission set, go to the customer’s account, and delete their related pending invoices.
This is incorrect and addresses the symptom, not the cause. Deleting pending invoices is a manual, one-time action. It does not stop the system from generating new invoices for the customer in the next billing cycle. The Billing Operations User permission set also may not grant the ability to suspend billing.

Reference:
Salesforce Help: "Suspend and Resume Billing for an Account" - This official documentation describes the process of using the "Suspend Billing" button on an account record to stop all future billing for that specific customer, which is the exact capability needed to solve this scenario.

Summary:
In Salesforce Revenue Cloud, pricing procedures can involve multiple elements, including formula-based calculations, discounts, and custom scripts. When the calculated quote price does not match expectations, consultants need a way to trace each pricing action in sequence. Pricing Debug Mode provides a detailed, step-by-step view of the pricing calculation, including any adjustments applied by custom logic or pricing elements, enabling precise diagnosis and validation of pricing behavior.

Correct Option:

C — Check the Pricing Debug Mode Output
This is correct because Pricing Debug Mode outputs a detailed trace of all actions in the pricing procedure for a given quote. It shows:

The sequence of pricing elements applied

Any adjustments from formulas or discounts

Effects of custom pricing scripts

This trace allows the consultant to identify exactly where and why the final price differs from expectations.

Incorrect Options:

A — Check the Pricing Operations Console
The Pricing Operations Console shows pricing configurations and historical executions but does not provide a step-by-step trace of calculations for debugging a single quote.

B — Check the Revenue Transaction Logs
Revenue Transaction Logs capture processed transactions for revenue recognition purposes, not the intermediate pricing calculations. They cannot be used to trace the quote-level pricing logic.

Reference:
Salesforce Revenue Cloud Documentation → Pricing Debug Mode, Tracing Quote Calculations, Pricing Procedures.

Summary:
The key challenge is balancing the executive mandate for a unified, governed catalog with the diverse needs of individual business units. The solution must enable reuse and cross-selling while allowing for unique bundling, selling models, and approvals per line of business. The architect must propose a structure that is centralized for governance but flexible enough to be tailored, avoiding the pitfalls of siloed, duplicate catalogs or rigid, one-size-fits-all approaches.

Correct Option:

A: Lead with a shared catalog with reusable components, attributes, and selling models tailored per business need.
This approach directly meets both executive and business unit needs. A shared catalog with a library of reusable core products and attributes provides the unified foundation required for governance and cross-selling.

Business units can then create their own specific bundles using these shared components, applying their unique logic, selling models (subscription, one-time, etc.), and approval processes on top of this common base. This achieves both standardization and flexibility.

Incorrect Option:

B: Prioritize stakeholder preferences for custom bundles so each bundle independently supports different business units.
This leads to a disorganized and ungoverned catalog. Allowing completely independent bundle creation without a shared component foundation results in product duplication, inconsistent data, and an inability to report on or cross-sell core products effectively across the organization.

C: Design multiple catalogs for each business unit to isolate business logic and reduce dependencies.
This directly violates the executive requirement for a "unified catalog." Multiple siloed catalogs prevent reuse, make cross-selling nearly impossible, and create a governance nightmare as the company would have to manage multiple versions of what could be the same product.

Reference:
Salesforce Help: "Plan Your Product Catalog" - The official documentation emphasizes strategies for building a scalable catalog, including using a shared set of core products and attributes to promote consistency and reuse across different business units and product lines, which is the principle behind Option A.

Summary:
Salesforce Contracts AI enables automatic extraction of contract details and clauses from PDFs. To use this feature effectively, a contract extraction template must be set up. The template defines how extracted information maps to Salesforce fields and leverages a context definition to standardize the data structure. This ensures that extracted clauses and fields are correctly associated with the appropriate objects and attributes in Salesforce for downstream reporting and automation.

Correct Option:

C — Attribute Definition and Context Mapping
This is correct because when creating a contract extraction template, the consultant must define which attributes to extract (Attribute Definition) and map them to the existing context definition. This mapping allows the extracted data to populate the correct fields and objects in Salesforce, ensuring consistency and usability of the extracted contract information across the system.

Incorrect Options:

A — Record Type and Field Mapping
This is incorrect because Record Type selection alone does not specify how extracted data should map to Salesforce attributes. Field mapping without context definition would not standardize the data structure for Contracts AI.

B — Attribute Definition and Field Mapping
This is partially correct, as attribute definitions are required, but without context mapping, the template cannot associate the extracted attributes to the correct Salesforce objects and workflows, which is necessary for proper integration.

Reference:
Salesforce Revenue Cloud Documentation → Contracts AI, Contract Extraction Templates, Context Mapping for Clause Extraction.