Which option describes a typical workflow when resolving errors reported by the RDC?

The typical workflow for resolving errors reported by the RDC involves reviewing the errors, addressing them, and then re-importing the data. This approach ensures that you systematically identify and fix issues in the data before attempting another import. By reviewing the errors first, you gain insights into what might have gone wrong, allowing for targeted corrections. Resolving these errors ensures the integrity and quality of the data being imported into the system, which is critical for maintaining accuracy in records and analyses.

Once the errors are addressed, re-importing is necessary to apply the changes made to the data, ensuring that the updated import reflects the corrections. This process not only enhances the reliability of the data but also minimizes the chances of future errors, promoting a more efficient workflow in managing and utilizing data effectively.

In contrast, modifying the import file and restarting the process without addressing the root cause of the errors can lead to recurring issues. Ignoring errors to enhance speed risks data integrity and overall system functionality. Consulting support for every error can be impractical and inefficient, as many errors can often be resolved through careful review and understanding of the system’s requirements.