In Saviynt–ServiceNow integration using theSaviynt App for ServiceNow, therequest fulfillment location is flexible and depends on how the integration is configured. This is why Option C is correct.

Saviynt supports different integration patterns with ServiceNow. In one model,ServiceNow acts as the front-end request system, while Saviynt handles the fulfillment (provisioning, approvals, and access governance). In another model, ServiceNow can handle certain fulfillment steps depending on how workflows, APIs, and ticketing configurations are defined.

For example, if the integration is configured such that ServiceNow creates a request and passes it to Saviynt, thenSaviynt performs fulfillment. Alternatively, if certain fulfillment logic or orchestration is handled within ServiceNow workflows or ITSM processes, thenServiceNow may drive parts of the fulfillment process.

This flexibility allows organizations to align the integration with their operational model, whether centralized in Saviynt or distributed with ServiceNow. Therefore, fulfillment is not restricted to a single system and is determined byconfiguration and architectural design choices.

In Saviynt EIC, approval assignment for access requests is primarily controlled throughworkflow configurations, which are associated either at theendpoint level or security system level. Therefore, the first step in troubleshooting incorrect approver assignment is to validate whether the correct workflow is attached and properly configured at both levels (Options A and C). Workflows define approval logic such as manager, owner, or custom approvers, and misconfiguration here often leads to incorrect routing.

Option B is also correct becausedelegation settingscan override the intended approver. If a delegate is configured for an approver, the request may be routed to the delegate instead of the original approver, causing confusion if not validated.

Option D is incorrect because in Saviynt, approvers are typicallysystem-driven based on workflow rules, not manually selected by the requester in most standard configurations. The requester does not usually control approver assignment unless explicitly customized, making this option irrelevant for standard troubleshooting.

The correct answer is B. REST Connector . Saviynt documentation explains that REST integration is intended for applications whose data and lifecycle actions are available through REST endpoints. It states that the REST integration enables organizations to gain visibility, manage the user lifecycle, and govern access for data available in the REST application or REST endpoint. That directly matches the question, which requires imports plus provisioning and deprovisioning for an API-driven target system.

Saviynt’s REST connector documentation also notes that provisioning and deprovisioning are supported when the connection is configured correctly. This makes the REST connector the standard choice when the target system does not use an out-of-the-box native connector but does provide usable REST APIs. The other options do not fit the requirement. Active Directory Connector is specific to AD use cases, SMTP Configuration is only for email delivery, and Dataset Configuration is an administrative data-structuring feature rather than an application integration method. In Saviynt Level 200 terms, when an application is API-first and lifecycle actions must be automated, the REST connector is the appropriate design decision.

Saviynt’sRole MiningandDuplicate Identity Management (DIM)features are key components of Identity Analytics and Governance.

Option Ais correct because Role Mining analyzes user access patterns and identifies similarities across users. Based on these similarities, Saviynt suggests logical groupings of entitlements that can be converted into roles, improving role design and governance.

Option Bis also correct. Thepercentage cut-offin Role Mining defines the threshold for common access across users. A higher threshold (e.g., 60% or more) ensures that only frequently shared entitlements are considered. In practice, this drives mining toward highly consistent access patterns, often close to universally assigned (near 100%), ensuring stronger role accuracy.

Option Cis correct because access to DIM functionality is controlled throughSAV Roles. Administrators must explicitly grant permissions to view and manage duplicate identities.

Option Dis incorrect because DIM not only merges identity attributes but can also consolidate associated access (accounts and entitlements), ensuring a unified identity profile.

In Saviynt EIC, the correct configuration for controlling which roles appear in the Access Request screen is theRequest Roles Query / Role Request QueryunderGlobal Configuration. Saviynt’s official documentation forConfiguring Role Requestsstates that this setting is used tospecify a query to control the display of roles in Access Request, meaning only roles returned by that query are shown to the requester. That is exactly the use case in this question: filtering the visible role list by a user attribute such as country or location. A query can be written so that users from Country A see only the roles mapped for Country A.

The other options are not correct in this context.SAV Rolecontrols administrative UI permissions in Saviynt, not end-user role catalog filtering.Role Configuration - > User Queryis not the standard setting used to drive request-time role visibility for this scenario. Option D is incorrect because Saviynt explicitly supports this use case through the Request Roles Query capability.