No. IdentityIQ does not require a dedicated Catch step to accompany every individual workflow step capable of throwing an exception. Such a requirement would make workflows unnecessarily verbose and would not reflect normal workflow exception-handling design.
Workflow steps can execute scripts, rules, subprocesses, methods, approvals, and other operations, many of which can theoretically throw runtime exceptions. Exception handling can be designed at an appropriate level depending on the workflow ' s requirements. BeanShell logic can explicitly use exception handling where necessary, subprocess behavior can be handled by the calling process, and workflow-level failure processing can deal with unhandled exceptions.
A Catch construct is useful when the workflow needs to intercept a particular failure and intentionally route execution into recovery, cleanup, notification, auditing, or another controlled path. It is therefore an exception-handling mechanism , not a mandatory companion to every potentially failing step.
The Word bank already tests other workflow-step semantics, including the available Script, Rule, Subprocess, and Call Method actions; those are separate concepts from mandatory exception handling. The universal wording “must accompany every step” makes this proposition false.
References/topics: IdentityIQ Engineer — workflow step types, exception handling, Catch processing, BeanShell exceptions, subprocess failure handling, workflow error paths.
