I think this is were you are missing the bigger picture though.
The solutions to the problem in your industry might not be based on the skills or insights of your industry.
It might be that someone recognizes the similarity from another industry where the problem was solved in a specific way or that the insight just so happens to be solvable based on the knowledge of some specific technology.
And it's NOT about ideas it's about recognizing the real problem that hides underneath and which requires experience to understand.
I think both of you are talking past each other here.
The crux of your argument is that an outsider may be able to pattern-match better than industry insiders/domain experts. In other words, an outsider can recognize a potential solution by translating his/her experience with an efficient solution from a different industry.
He is saying that you need to properly understand things from the perspective of an industry insider before you declare that your solution is disruptive. In other words, you need to understand why things are the way they are before talking of reformation. This is the central lesson behind Chesterton's famous "Taking a Fence Down" [0] quote.
The solutions to the problem in your industry might not be based on the skills or insights of your industry.
It might be that someone recognizes the similarity from another industry where the problem was solved in a specific way or that the insight just so happens to be solvable based on the knowledge of some specific technology.
And it's NOT about ideas it's about recognizing the real problem that hides underneath and which requires experience to understand.
Here is the essay I ended writing https://medium.com/black-n-white/the-problem-with-problems-4... this might give you a better perspective on how this is useful no matter what constellation.