I found this point thought provoking because the path to action that the speaker is referring to is often overlooked. To be influential, the speaker's audience must be given the disposition to make a change. The end goal of the audience is engagement as well as them taking some kind of action as well.

I think the differentiation between "wicked problems" and other catastrophes is an important one to make because the situation changes rhetorically based on which one you are addressing. Wicked problems are issues that don't seem to have a linear path to an answer or a simple resolution. For example, the author states that something like an end to poverty would be a wicked problem as opposed to a "tame" one.