Final answer:
The common shortcoming of company vision statements that is not mentioned is the proper use of transitional words and phrases, as company vision statements typically do not require such grammatical components to be effective and are judged on clarity, inspiration, and values alignment instead.
Step-by-step explanation:
When considering the common shortcomings of company vision statements, we're looking for what is not a mentioned deficit in the vision's expression or construction based on the provided text and summary of Table 2.3. The critique throughout seems to focus on how the vision statements fail to meet various rhetorical and grammatical standards, such as summarizing effectively, having clear descriptive diction, using transitional words appropriately, subject-verb agreement, integrating quotations, constructing sentence structures, and maintaining verb tense consistency. However, not all of these critiques are typically associated with the common issues found in vision statements.
Company vision statements are crucial for outlining an organization's long-term goals and providing a sense of direction. Ensuring proper use of transitions or maintaining subject-verb agreement, while important in writing, are not customary focuses when evaluating the shortcomings of vision statements. Instead, these critiques more commonly apply to broader writing standards. Vision statements are typically assessed for clarity, inspiration, and alignment with company values, not for detailed grammatical correctness.
Given the focus on rhetorical effectiveness in the provided excerpts, it can be inferred that the use of transitional words and phrases is not a common shortcoming of company vision statements discussed in the text and Table 2.3. Since vision statements are meant to be concise and high-level, the need for transitional phrases is not as prevalent as in more complex and detailed writing. Hence, the lack of transitional words in a vision statement would not typically be considered a common shortcoming.