While I agree with the rest of your comment (esp the tl;dr), I completely disagree with the above. It's always about the product. Think of every recent Apple ad you've ever seen and ask yourself if they're showcasing the product or some nebulous 'vision'.
People who sign off on budgets don't get lauded because they bought into a 'vision'. It's because product X fits their requirement and likely solves a problem.
Vision, from the perspective of someone about to part with cold hard cash, isn't much of a factor.
OK, I may have phrased that badly. By "product" I meant simply the physical item itself and by "vision" I meant "what that thing can do for you". It's possible to make a beautiful, well-designed and all-round awesome product that's still useless because it doesn't actually fit any real use-case that potential customers might have.
That makes more sense to me now. I lump that all together in 'product' whereas vision is more about where a company is going and what philosophy is driving it (if you get my meaning).
It is possible to have customers who purchase based on vision/direction but this pretty much the defining characteristic of 'innovators' [1], who are willing to take risks on unfinished or poorly supported products.
While I agree with the rest of your comment (esp the tl;dr), I completely disagree with the above. It's always about the product. Think of every recent Apple ad you've ever seen and ask yourself if they're showcasing the product or some nebulous 'vision'.
People who sign off on budgets don't get lauded because they bought into a 'vision'. It's because product X fits their requirement and likely solves a problem.
Vision, from the perspective of someone about to part with cold hard cash, isn't much of a factor.