C_ARSUM Ariba Supplier Management Practice Question
When designing an approval flow for a supplier registration, what is the best practice for handling a 'Rejected' status?
⚠ Common exam trap
Candidates often assume a rejected registration means the process must be restarted from scratch, failing to utilize the feedback loop that allows for supplier correction.
Answer choices
Why each option matters
Answer the question above first, then reveal the full breakdown to understand why each option is right or wrong.
Correct answer & explanation
✓
Route the task back to the supplier with clear comments on the rejection.
When an approval is rejected, the workflow must provide a mechanism for the supplier to correct the identified issues. Providing clear feedback and routing the request back to the supplier ensures that the process continues efficiently without starting over. This approach minimizes administrative churn and ensures that the supplier is fully aware of what needs to be improved, directly supporting the objective of maintaining high-quality and compliant supplier data in the system.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✗
Delete the registration project and force the supplier to start over.
Why it's wrong here
Deleting a project is highly inefficient and destroys the audit trail of the previous submission. It frustrates suppliers and leads to high dropout rates. A proper workflow allows for revisions, which is more user-friendly and keeps the communication history intact for future audits and process improvements in the onboarding phase.
- ✓
Route the task back to the supplier with clear comments on the rejection.
Why this is correct
Routing back to the supplier is the standard practice for handling rejections. It keeps the original project alive, allowing the supplier to read the approver's comments and make the necessary corrections. This ensures a transparent and collaborative process that helps suppliers meet company requirements without unnecessary friction or time lost.
- ✗
Automatically escalate the rejection to the senior procurement manager.
Why it's wrong here
Escalation is not the primary mechanism for handling data quality issues. If a registration is rejected, it is usually because the data is incomplete or incorrect, which requires the supplier to take action, not the internal management. Escalation should only be used if there is a conflict in the approval process.
- ✗
Ignore the rejection and mark the project as 'Approved' anyway.
Why it's wrong here
Ignoring rejections violates compliance protocols and makes the approval workflow meaningless. It exposes the organization to risk by allowing unvetted or non-compliant suppliers into the system. This practice is a severe breach of internal controls and would be flagged during any standard procurement audit or compliance check by the company.
About these practice questions
Courseiva writes every C_ARSUM question from scratch — 250 in total, each with an explanation and a wrong-answer breakdown. None are copied from real exams or dumps. Learn why practice questions differ from exam dumps →
JA
Written and reviewed by Johnson Ajibi, MSc IT Security
Senior Network & Security Engineer · founder of Courseiva
Last reviewed September 2026 · checked against the official SAP exam blueprint
This C_ARSUM practice question is part of Courseiva's free SAP certification practice question bank. Courseiva provides original exam-style practice questions with explanations, topic-based practice, mock exams, readiness tracking, and study analytics to help learners prepare for the C_ARSUM exam.