Or do you intend to wait and continue monitoring performance over the next year to gauge if this is a temporary blip (or perhaps a lag effect at play with the price increases)?

I don't think of it as bad news per se, more like a mere absence of good news.
When it comes to the trajectory of observable value, flat spots do happen, as shown on the graph.
I don't worry about those too much. I presume earnings growth will resume, at some reasonable rate.
Maybe the future trend rate of value increase will be a pinch slower than before, but that's OK, it has been expected for ages.

Some years I make a lot of money from Berkshire stock, some years I don't. I think the coming year might be more like the latter.
If the current rally continues I may lighten up a bit more, or write covered calls, but I'm not leaving the party in a huff.

One thing for sure: if Apple's stock price languishes, we can certainly expect some badly reasoned articles on how Mr Buffett has lost his touch!
From the same people currently hailing his genius for the same pick.

I would have thought that a lack of pricing power (if that's the issue at play here) would be pretty damning for future value growth prospects even in a low inflation environment.

The hard part is determining the underlying reason for the weakness in profit trajectory at the operating divisions.
It's hard to disentangle all the moving parts, so all we can do is wait for a while and see what happens.
All the one-time issues will work their way through the system after a while, and we'll see what's left.
That's why the current results got me down a bit: I have been thinking the same thing for five quarters now, and the blip has not gone away yet.

For example, if it's a spike of wage inflation, then the pricing of our products and services can be expected to catch up and (mostly) restore the margins to normal.
If it's supply chain bottlenecks, they will return to some new normal and both Berkshire and its competitors will reach a new equilibrium on a level playing field at a new level.
If on the other hand we have just too many units that are getting old--towards the end of their years of above-average economics--that's a harder thing to fix.
For example, this article at the Economist makes me thoughtful--
economist.com - The business trend that unites walmart and tiffany and co
(probably unavailable without a subscription - try searching on the title "The business trend that unites Walmart and Tiffany" )
Random snip: "...sales at Burlington, a discount department store, grew by 13.2% year on year in the first quarter of this year, compared with a decline of 4.2% for Macy's, a middle-class stalwart...."
In short, it discusses how luxury goods are doing very well, and deep discount goods are doing very well, but the middle ranges are really suffering.
Berkshire has quite a few brands in that middle range, predicated on the notion that things like Kraft and Dairy Queen will appeal to the middle class forever.

The article ends:
"Investors would do well to take note. Conventional market wisdom dictates steering clear
of businesses in 'discretionary' spending categories (cars, clothes and other non-essentials)
in favour of 'staples' (necessities such as groceries) in tough economic times. The new logic
of consumption suggests that the pedlars of the most essential fare can expect to do well as
the economy sours. But so can sellers of the exceedingly discretionary."
Maybe Berkshire needs some more luxury brands in the mix. Netjets counts, and in some senses Apple, but it's far from the majority.

Jim