The decision to continue the approach and landing was not the cause of this accident.It was the loss of stabilised flight in the flare and the subsequent lack of correct retardation procedures, which led to the deep landing and overrun.
Simulator training can assist in reinforcing the need to touchdown at the correct point and use all retardation devices promptly, however, for the most part, runway conditions are conducive to 'soft' touchdowns. How often have you been briefed by the PF as to what retardation will be used and which turn-off point will be taken, only to witness a deeper than planned touchdown and the same braking/reverse used, resulting in turning-off much further down the runway than briefed. Many inexperienced pilots seem to concentrate on gentle touchdowns rather than correct ones.
As for whether or not to continue the approach, this comes with good command training. I would suggest that even with an experienced co-pilot, this should have been a Captain's landing, in those conditions. However, the previous meeting between these two pilots had ended unpleasantly (with a Captain-under-check failing the detail on a different type). This may have led to an authority gradient in the co-pilot's mind and an unwillingness to object to the Captain's decisions.
Emphasising correct landing techniques in training, is a relatively simple task, but often overlooked, especially when courses are reduced for costs reasons.
Training out mind-sets, such as continuing approaches because preceding aircraft have already safely done so, although prudence would suggest an immediate discontinuation, is quite a difficult thing to do. There is also the individual's 'macho' view, that it is nothing he/she has not coped with successfully before and will do so again.