Having litigated many of these on both sides, some are written better than others. As referenced above, they are frequently used in areas where particular knowledge of a device, system (Flo’s system?), customer list or pricing schedule are important to the company seeking to protect them. Sometimes poor drafting doesn’t lead to the problem. It may just be the facts. For instance, if a customer list can be generated in a non-protected way, the non-compete likely won’t be enforced if the customer list is the issue. Same with pricing schedule. Non-competes with confidential information restraints are frequently the utility a company uses to protect themselves.
Length of term and geography are also critical components. The non-compete portion is to prevent unfair competition after an employee gains experience and knowledge in a field then leaves, likely for more money, to turn around and compete with the employer using what they learned.
One thing on a human level that has perturbed me about these: if you gave your word, in writing, not to compete then why not just keep your word? Money?