Do you mean that with dynamic SQL it is somehow possible to do FOREACH or write less code?

Dynamic SQL could achieve the "writing less code" goal using something like this:

No, SQL Server doesn't let you pass tables or columns as parameters. You could derive something like this using dynamic SQL.

But I might also we concerned about protentional blocking when...

You have no indexes, so you are forcing the query engine to scan the entire tables.

Yes, not equals/not in/not exists can be less efficient than equals/in/exists, but with proper indexing...

One True Lookup Table:

https://www.sqlservercentral.com/forums/topic/is-having-a-lookup-table-that-is-for-multiple-entities-a-common-practice

In addition to other concerns, to me, I tend to view lookup tables themselves as an entity. If they contain unrelated "things", they are not normalized. And...

You would have to use a user-defined function to reference columns in other tables (which could have performance impacts).

Your table design may be wrong if you have a column value...

Hosts file alias?

SQL Native client alias?

CNAME or AD computer name alias?

What percent_complete does the progress query return? (know that it's not necessarily linear/precise)

What reasons do you have to believe restore will suddenly become faster and complete in a small fraction...

Note: SQL Server Express is not supported as a replication publisher - only as a subscriber.

So backup & restore or a homebuilt process for pulling data to the central...

Do you have reliable, reasonably high-bandwidth communication between the head office and all those satellite offices locations? Transactional replication could cause issues if not.

Another option would be to restore backups...

Employee/Person: Response By indicates a relationship in another table to Employee/Person. It is not an attribute of Employee/Person.  Even less so is Response On datetime. Attributes of an Employee/Person might...

Good point. I got tangled  in the jumping between tables and logical design too.

My intent (not clearly stated) was for table naming.

Glad to hear it!

First rule of tech support. 🙂

That's an ELT (Extract, Load, & Transform) strategy using a staging table, as opposed to an ETL strategy (in which you would do the transformation before importing, loading directly into...

As Scott already suggested, think about entities & attributes.

What are the entities (actors/objects/categories) involved? What attributes do the entities have? How do they relate? One-to-one? Many-to-many? (e.g., can you have...

CPZ Name & CPZ Code appear to be related. Is it one-to-one? (in which case they should be in a lookup table, and only reference CPZ Code in other tables)

Or...