Sentence Correction

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.


A. 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.
B. 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.
C. 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.
D. 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.
E. 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.

OA: (C)

My thoughts

[spoiler]I don't like C because what is the antecedent of the latter "it"

E - besides having being, what is wrong with E? [/spoiler]

I personally think OA is wrong but someone lemme know what your thoughts are.

Here my point of view:

C) 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.

It's right, look at the construction.
First part
Subject (an executive)+ modifier (who is likely to miss a course of action) + Verb (is likely to miss) + Object (signs)
Second part:
when they ("they" can refer only to signs, the only plural before) do appear especially if it ("it" clearly refers to a course of action, because the executive would be "he", the signs would have been plural) has worked well in the past.


E. 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.

In this phrase is not clear to what "Being heavily committed" is referring to. who is heavily committed? it's a modifier without a subject to modify.
In order to use "being" you should change the phrase, something like:

The executive, being heavily committed to a course of action,, is likely to miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear...

Good study

I saw this question when I took a GMATPREP test a few weeks ago. C is incorrect because it could refer to either course of action or trouble.

The OA is E. This question shows that being is not always incorrect.

Can we get a confirmation on what the OA is?

"It" refers to course of action. Trouble is plural they because it is actually signs...

E has a misplace modifier at the beginning of the sentence.

For both reason IMO answer is C.

OA:E.
Most of us know have problem with E 'cos of the word BEING>which is almost always wrong.But this question shows that "being" can also be correct.
CAN SOMEONE PUT UP THE RULES AS TO WHEN EXACTLY IS BEING CORRECT??

This is an OG12 #101 question

OA E