Dave Logan makes a compelling argument that the health of a company depends both on the future as communicated by its CEO, and on the CEO's commitment to realizing the performance required to realize that future.
I don't disagree with him, but I don't think it's the only way a company can flourish.
Speaking from the middle, I see companies that survive bad CEO's through the good judgement and mature behavior of their professionals and front-line managers. These are the people who care for the customers and the other employees. They would like to work for inspired leadership, but they'll accept a civilized place of employment.
Once a sufficient number of well-meaning employees exist to support each other, they can usually work out a future. And such companies are easier to find than the high flyers. I think many young professionals long for meaning the way I did when I started out, and look for it in a grand future, while neglecting the meaningful community at hand.
CBS News: Why Built-to-Last is a Myth, 2012-Sep-26, by Dave Logan
If companies are going to change and reinvent themselves, then they need to follow a path that will necessarily involve new futures, as they also raise performance standards. ... It is possible to focus on the new future and production issues at the same time. In fact, doing so is far more effective than to focus on one without considering the other.