High quality information on users is critically important to the foundation of strategy, and the only way that quality can be provided is by someone qualified to do it well.

Michael Porter's definition of strategy can be summarised as "what can we profitably offer, which customers need, and which competitors will find hard to copy?"

You need high quality information on user needs (driving purchase behaviour) and competitor capabilities in order to answer that. Both market research and UX research cover this area. Market research is a highly professionalised industry like accounting - most companies hire a specalist to do their taxes. UX researchers typically receive extensive training, but there isn't the same kind of globally-recognised qualification or governing body, so you'd have to look at their portfolio.

Product managers, in general, are not qualified to do this kind of work at all. Until 2021, "no market need" was the biggest killer of startups, but now it's "ran out of cash" - they don't understand what customers need, they build the wrong thing, and the company tanks.

I'd recommend changes to your questions: never ask the customer which features are missing. When you ask directly about pain points, you get superficial answers - the real truth emerges naturally if you reach enough depth. What you share immediately after the interview is a top-level debrief; the insights are generated later after rigorous sifting of the data best left to someone with specialist qualifications and experience. The insights are memorable because the assumptions of the product manager are almost always wrong.

When you test with internal teams, you get the input of people who think like the people at your company think and this is seldom the way that your customers think. It can be useful sometimes, but it's another example of risk.