The original post was interesting because it attempted to simplify something (the role of CEO) to its core, which is an exercise that is always thought provokin

The original post was interesting because it attempted to simplify something (the role of CEO) to its core, which is an exercise that is always thought provoking and revealing. This post is more just a run-of-the-mill HBR-style article. It seems to be more a clarification for people who won't get the point anyway. To paraphrase the first clarification: [setting a vision involves developing one in the first place...] Yuhthink?