The least useful metric for optimizing the design of your data subject request workflow is tracking the number of data subjects who?
The least useful metric for optimizing the design of your data subject request workflow is tracking the number of data subjects who?
The least useful metric for optimizing the design of your data subject request workflow is tracking the number of requests by geographic origin. While geographic information might be relevant for compliance or reporting purposes, it doesn't provide direct insights into the efficiency or effectiveness of your workflow process itself. Metrics such as how requests are made or the types of requests are more actionable for workflow optimization.
B. Geographic location is absolutely a useful metric. different countries have different timelines for responding to DSARs. By tracking geo location of where most transfers are coming from you can tailor your workflows accordingly to the laws around response times for that country.
While geographic information may be relevant for certain reporting or compliance purposes, it may not provide as much actionable insight into the workflow's efficiency and effectiveness as the other metrics.
The number of data subjects who "Made requests by geographic origin" would be the least useful metric for optimizing the design of your data subject request workflow. The geographical origin of the requestors doesn't provide significant insights into the efficiency or effectiveness of the workflow process itself.
Answer A is correct.
Answer D is correct.
After thinking again I think the answer should be B, the rest result in some kind of change to the workflow
I suggest A