Think about what actions impact what - the cause and effect.
The statement is structured: "In order for x to happen, y is necessary. However, in order for y, z is necessary. Implying that z is not likely, x won't happen". The closest that comes to this is D, although I'm not crazy about how much more strongly worded the conclusion is (statement says not optimistic, while D says the outcome is unavoidable).
E looks appealing at first, but it differs in that reporting or not reporting company performance (y) doesn't impact whether or not honesty is the best policy (x). There's no cause and effect. Because of this, the conclusion doesn't refer back to x like the original statement does, but to y. A and B are similar in that y doesn't really cause x.
C is flips things around, but is initially similar. "y is necessary for x to happen. In order for y, z is necessary." So far so good - even though the order of the first condition got flipped around, the structure is essentially the same. However, the next part "Therefore, x is only possible if z" doesn't imply that z is not likely.