In the reconciliation process, an appraiser should:

Option A: Always average the three approaches to value

Mechanical averaging of the three approaches ignores the fundamental principle that different approaches may have varying degrees of reliability and applicability for different property types. This approach fails to consider data quality, market conditions, or the appropriateness of each method for the specific assignment. Professional judgment, not mathematical formulas, should guide the reconciliation process.

Option B: Give equal weight to all approaches used

Equal weighting assumes all approaches are equally reliable and applicable, which is rarely the case in practice. Different property types and market conditions make certain approaches more or less reliable - for example, the income approach is typically given more weight for investment properties, while the sales comparison approach is emphasized for residential properties. Equal weighting ignores these important distinctions.

Option D: Use only the approach that gives the highest value

Using only the highest value approach violates appraisal standards and professional ethics, as it suggests bias toward a predetermined outcome rather than objective analysis. This approach ignores the principle that higher values are not necessarily more accurate, and it fails to consider which approach provides the most reliable indication of market value. Such practice could constitute advocacy rather than objective appraisal.