Late-breaking insights in product development aren’t caused by negligence but by a lack of structure that pulls existing team knowledge into concept discussions early, when changes are cheaper. Dianna describes an experiment running three product briefs (solar post-installation support, a portable oxygen concentrator, and a field lettuce harvester module) through traditional versus structured concept development. Both produced credible outputs, but the structured method added context: linking each design input to a specific use-process failure or targeted benefit, its severity or importance, and a clear acceptance condition. Engineering inherits clarity rather than having to guess intent. Dianna proposes a three-question filter (who fails, how severe/important, what “done” means) and challenges listeners to apply it to one current design input. Visit the YouTube series showing side-by-side results: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLTtGpfRyyNcZ9qMVL2HmWA7heE3IdyfbtSend us a messageSupport the showIf your team is still catching problems too late — let's talk.→ Schedule a free discovery call: Dianna's calendarWant insights like this?→ Subscribe to my newsletter: qualityduringdesign.substack.comGet the full framework.→ Pierce the Design Fog ABOUT DIANNADianna Deeney is a quality advocate for product development with over 25 years of experience in manufacturing. She is president of Deeney Enterprises, LLC, which helps organizations and people improve engineering design.