Free Practice Questions for OMG OMG-OCEB2-FUND100 Exam

The requirement is:“after completing task A, wait one hour before starting task B.”

In BPMN:

ACatching Intermediate Timer Eventplacedin the normal sequence flowbetween two activities means:

Activity A completes.

The token arrives at the Timer Intermediate Event.

The timer waits for its specified duration (here, one hour).

Once the timer condition is satisfied, the token proceeds to Activity B.

Option Ashows exactly this pattern:

Task A → (Intermediate Timer Event) → Task B.

Why the others are not correct:

Option Bvisually suggests the timer isbeforeA or attached differently, not clearly expressing “after A, then wait, then B.”

Option Cuses aboundary timer eventon A. A boundary timer on A represents atimeout during A’s execution(e.g., if A takes longer than one hour, do something), not a guaranteed wait period after A finishes.

Option Dintroduces a gateway and an end event, implying alternate paths rather than a simple fixed delay between A and B.

Thus, the diagram that correctly models “after completing A, wait one hour, then start B” isOption A.

In BPMN, when anExpanded Sub-Processcontains activities (here:CandD)without any Sequence Flows between them, there isno defined execution orderimplied by their vertical or horizontal placement. Unless there are explicit sequence flows or gateway logic:

Neither “C then D” nor “D then C” is mandated.

They may be performed in any order, potentially overlapping, or by ad-hoc control external to the diagram.

Therefore the only correct statement is thattheir order is undefined in the diagram.

The BMM aligns directly with theZachman Framework.

Specifically:

TheOwner’s perspectivecorresponds to thebusiness view(row 2).

TheWhy columnof Zachman represents motivation:EndsandMeans.

The BMM’s purpose is to document:

Ends(Goals, Objectives)

Means(Strategies, Tactics)

The influence of external/internal factors

This exactly corresponds to theOwner’s view of the “Why” column.

Thus,Option B is correct.

In BPMN,parallel flowmeans that more than one path is takensimultaneously. Besides using a Parallel Gateway, one legitimate way is:

Anactivity with multiple outgoing, unconditional Sequence Flows: each such flow is taken when the activity completes, so the paths proceed in parallel.

That is exactly what optionCstates:Multiple unconditional paths exit an activity→ all of them are taken, which starts parallel execution.

OptionA(multiple paths from anexclusivegateway) is not parallel; an exclusive gateway allowsonly oneoutgoing path per token.

OptionB(multiple conditional paths) may or may not create parallelism, depending on which conditions are true; it’s not the canonical way to model parallel flow.

OptionDis invalid because an exclusive gateway cannot have multiple default flows.

Hence,Cis the legitimate way to commence parallel flow.

In BMM,Influencersare factors—internal or external—that caninfluence an organization’s ability to achieve its Ends. They can be trends, events, conditions, or stakeholders.

The observation“Younger customers buying more Chilean wine”is a description of amarket trend/conditionin the environment.

That is exactly the role of anInfluencer: a situation or trend that may positively or negatively affect goals and strategies.

If the winery evaluates that trend (for example, calling it anOpportunity), that evaluation would be modeled as anAssessment. The raw trend itself is the Influencer.

Option A (Threat) is atypeof Assessment (negative evaluation of an Influencer).

Option C (Assessment) would be something like “The increased Chilean-wine preference among younger customers is an opportunity for our brand,” which adds judgment.

Option D (Course of Action) would be a response, such as “Launch a Chilean-style product line,” which is a Means, not the trend itself.

So the element“Younger customers buying more Chilean wine”is modeled as anInfluencerin BMM

Traditional (functional) work managementorganizes people and work bydepartments or specialties(e.g., Sales, Finance, HR, Operations). From an OMG BPM and value-chain perspective, the mainweaknessof this traditional model is that it:

Focuses onoptimizing individual functionsrather than optimizing theend-to-end processthat delivers value to customers.

Encourageslocal optimization(department KPIs) at the expense of global optimization (process performance, customer experience).

Createssilosand coordination issues across boundaries.

This is captured inOption D:

Lack of end-to-end focus

Why the other options are wrong:

A. Clear definition of roles and responsibilities– That is typically astrengthof functional management; roles are clearly defined within each department.

B. Functional excellence– Functional organizations often deliverstrong specialist expertise; again, that’s a strength, not a weakness.

C. Bad vision and mission– Vision and mission areenterprise-level strategic artifacts, not intrinsic to functional vs process structure.

Thus, the key structural weakness of traditional functional management is itslack of end-to-end focus, soDis correct.

===============

In theObject Management Group (OMG) Business Process Maturity Model (BPMM), each maturity level is characterized by a specific scope of focus and a defined set of process areas.

ForMaturity Level 2 – Managed, BPMM clearly states that the emphasis is on bringing basic management discipline toindividual organizational units where work is performed, typically calledwork units(e.g., departments, teams, projects, operational units).

At this level:

Processes areplanned, performed, monitored, and controlledat thework unit level.

The goal is to ensure that commitments are met, performance is tracked, and issues are managed within these units.

Process areas at Level 2 (such as those concerned with work unit management, performance, and corrective action) explicitly assume that theprimary organizational entity of concern is the work unit, not yet the end-to-end, cross-functional business process.

This is a key distinction in BPMM:

Level 1 (Initial):Work is performed, but processes are ad hoc and largely unmanaged.

Level 2 (Managed):Processes are managedwithin work units. The discipline of basic planning, monitoring, and control is introduced at this local level.

Level 3 (Standardized):Processes becomestandardized and harmonized across the organization, and attention shifts toend-to-end processesthat cut across functional and organizational boundaries.

Higher levels (4 and 5) further institutionalize measurement, predictability, and continuous optimization across these standardized processes.

Given this structure:

Option A – work units

Correct. This is exactly the organizational focus of Level 2 process areas in BPMM.

Option B – business area managers

While business area managers may be involved, BPMM does not define maturity level 2 as focusing on managers as entities; it focuses onwork units as the organizational locusof process management.

Option C – information technology operations

IT operations may constitute a particular type of work unit, but BPMM Level 2 isnot limitedto IT; it is generic to all work units across the enterprise. Therefore, this is too narrow and not aligned with the model’s definition.

Option D – end-to-end product and service offerings

This reflects a Level 3 and above concern, wherecross-functional, end-to-end processesare standardized and managed as a whole. It isnotthe focus of maturity level 2, which is still concentrated on thelocal, work-unitperspective.

Accordingly, based on the OMGBusiness Process Maturity Modelspecification, the process areas atmaturity level 2focus onwork unitsas the primary organizational entities.

In BPMN (as used in OMG-aligned certifications),Boundary Eventscan be interrupting or non-interrupting. The general rule is:

Many boundary events (Timer, Message, Signal, etc.)can be eitherinterrupting or non-interrupting.

Some types, however, existonly as interrupting boundary events:

Error Boundary Event– always interrupting the activity/subprocess it is attached to.

Cancel Boundary Event– always interrupting and only valid on a Transaction Sub-Process.

Compensation Boundary Event– used to trigger compensation behavior and treated as a special interrupt-style handler attached to the scope of the completed activity.

So, among boundary events,Error, Cancel, and Compensationare treated asalways interrupting variants, in contrast with others that can be non-interrupting.

Thus optionAcorrectly captures this differentiating property; the other options contradict the specification or reverse the visual notation (C) or incorrectly constrain outgoing flows from boundary events (D).

Smith and Fingar describe human-system interaction components as:

Workflow(routing, sequencing of human tasks)

Automation / work allocation

Task management(task lists, inboxes, lifecycle mgmt.)

Form-based data entry(human data interaction layer)

Option D is theexact matchto the classification provided inThe Third Wave.

The other options include unrelated BPMN elements or organizational metrics not used by Smith & Fingar.

InFragment A,Run Candy Productionis a subprocess with aboundary eventlabeledExtruder Stuck Onattached to it.

According to BPMN 2.0:

A boundary event attached directly to an activity/subprocess is evaluatedwhile that activity is executing.

When it triggers (here, when the “Extruder Stuck On” condition occurs), itinterruptsthe subprocess (for an interrupting boundary event) and the normal internal flow stops. Control is redirected along the boundary-event’s outgoing sequence flow (toward the alarm/handling path).

So, in Fragment A, the first time the extruder gets stuck during the execution ofRun Candy Production, that subprocess is interrupted and the alternate flow (e.g., cease production alarm, possibly skipping remaining steps inside the subprocess) is taken.

InFragment B, the “Extruder Stuck On?” is modeled as anExclusive Gatewayafter the internal tasks (afterConsume Excess and Substandard Candies). That means:

The condition ischecked only when the token reaches that gateway, i.e., after finishing the last internal task.

If “Yes”, we follow the alarm/cease path; if “No”, we continue to the normal completion/cleaning path.

This is exactly what optionDstates.

Options A and C say the fragments have the same or inverted behavior, which contradicts the execution semantics of boundary events vs. gateways.

Option B incorrectly assumes the boundary event is specifically an Error Event and misstates the validity of Fragment A. The fragment is valid BPMN; the key difference iswhen and howthe stuck-extruder condition is handled, captured correctly only by optionD.