Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action, especially if it has worked well in the past, makes it likely to miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear.
Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action, especially if it has worked well in the past, makes it likely to miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear.
An executive who is heavily committed to a course of action, especially one that worked well in the past, makes missing signs of incipient trouble or misinterpreting ones likely when they do appear.
An executive who is heavily committed to a course of action is likely to miss or misinterpret signs of incipient trouble when they do appear, especially if it has worked well in the past.
Executives’ being heavily committed to a course of action, especially if it has worked well in the past, makes them likely to miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpreting them when they do appear.
Being heavily committed to a course of action, especially one that has worked well in the past, is likely to make an executive miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear.
以下是国外论坛大神的解释:
'it' is ambiguous, because it could potentially refer either to 'course of action' (the intended antecedent) or to 'incipient trouble'. also note that grammatical parallelism doesn't help: both of those possible antecedents are objects of prepositions - neither is the subject of its own clause (which would thereby create parallelism with 'it', which is the subject of its clause).
e is the best choice here. i cringe a bit at the use of 'being' - my first thought is that we could make the sentence better by using a noun, such as 'commitment' - but then you'd need some sort of possessive pronoun to show that it's the executive who's committed. in any case, (e) is definitely the best of the options here, none of which is perfect by any stretch.