sit parallel

21:43 Aug 26, 2013 

"They understand that
[
detailed description of one activity
]
is critical to a successful learning solution."

The subject of "is" is a rather long description of one activity / one list of actions.
It's probably a borderline case where you have to decide if the subject is the whole list (one) or the (many) elements of the list. Doesn't ring any alarm bells to me, and I'm usually pretty good at spotting the only mistake in pages of text.

A subject 17 words long - doesn't help for quick understanding! An easier to follow version could be:

"They understand that for a successful learning solution it is critical to manage development and implement learning programs that complement those efforts and (sit parallel) are aimed at future business requirements"
(but that may be too much "plain speak" for some writers, convinced that making it complicated makes it more credible...)
This way there's not one broken thread, no need to go back 17 words to find the thread to resume.

20:43 Aug 26, 2013 

In that case, please could you show us how you are parsing it then, as this particular ENS is perplexed by it — having read it, carefully, several times.

On the face of it, 'managing' and 'implementing' are both the subjects of the verb 'is critical', which rather flies in the face of a basic grammar rule about verb / subject number agreement.

20:39 Aug 26, 2013 

except that you have to reread it at least once to slice it the right way - sub-clauses inside sub-clauses not helping.

16:49 Aug 26, 2013 

je me suis heurtée au même problème logique et j'en ai conclus que "is" se réfère à la dynamique d'ensemble en quelque sorte ;-)

16:45 Aug 26, 2013 

The verb should be "are". It makes more sense, doesn't it? Thanks for looking at it Tony.

16:42 Aug 26, 2013 

..or is there something wrong with this sentence?

I at first read it as "managing... and implementing... is..." ?? Surely the verb should be 'are'?

Or are they trying to say "managing development and implementing..."? In which case, I'd have thought the noun ought to have been 'implementation of..."?

Either way, it seems to me that something is amiss...