820-427 · Question #51
A business lead in a large service supply chain organization wants to improve information sharing within his operations team through the use of wikis and other collaboration technologies. After a…
The correct answer is B. Adopting the existing corporate wiki platform but limiting its use to only those capabilities that. Option B is correct because it delivers immediate business value by leveraging an existing, already-approved corporate tool, while respecting the company's strategic roadmap - the team uses only the features that work now, avoiding lock-in or rework when the upgrade arrives in…
Question
A business lead in a large service supply chain organization wants to improve information sharing within his operations team through the use of wikis and other collaboration technologies. After a quick assessment, he found an internal wiki offering that marginally met the needs of his group, and he learned that the company has a two-year roadmap to upgrade the wiki to a more feature-rich product. What is his best course of action that delivers immediate business value while aligning with the company's goal of reducing long-term operations costs?
Options
- ASelecting and negotiating a license for a third-party, cloud-hosted collaboration solution that
- BAdopting the existing corporate wiki platform but limiting its use to only those capabilities that
- CInstalling the target-state collaboration solution on a workgroup server in his lab and migrating
- DTell his IT staff to design and develop a custom solution.
How the community answered
(43 responses)- A9% (4)
- B70% (30)
- C16% (7)
- D5% (2)
Explanation
Option B is correct because it delivers immediate business value by leveraging an existing, already-approved corporate tool, while respecting the company's strategic roadmap - the team uses only the features that work now, avoiding lock-in or rework when the upgrade arrives in two years. This approach minimizes cost, reduces IT overhead, and keeps the team aligned with enterprise governance.
Why the distractors fail:
- A introduces a third-party cloud solution that duplicates investment, creates a redundant contract, and directly conflicts with the goal of reducing long-term operations costs - the company will still have to migrate away from it later.
- C shadows the corporate roadmap by deploying the target-state solution early on a workgroup server, creating an unsanctioned, unsupported instance that IT will eventually have to absorb or decommission - adding cost and complexity, not reducing it.
- D is the most expensive and risky option: custom development takes time, requires ongoing maintenance, and produces a one-off tool that diverges entirely from the company's standardized platform strategy.
Memory tip: Think "adopt and adapt" - when a company already has a tool and a published upgrade path, the right answer almost always uses what exists now within its current limits, rather than buying, building, or jumping ahead. Any option that adds a new vendor, a shadow system, or custom code is creating future debt.
Topics
Community Discussion
No community discussion yet for this question.