This person is assuming that people want his advice, or to tell them why they're wrong.
Very often people are intent on doing something that seems stupid to you, but smart to them. In that situation they really don't want to be told that they are wrong and the best thing you can do is stand nearby, ready to dial 911.
Sometimes the only "right" response is "I would not have thought of doing it that way. What can I do to help you make it go well?"
He's talking about consulting. I would sure hope the person paying him for advice wants his advice. And the idea here is that it's preferable to get a job with someone who will listen to that advice they paid for to reach a reasonable conclusion, which seems like a perfectly good plan to me.
Often consulting clients only want the consultant to validate what they've already decided to do. Sure, it's best if they listen to you; you are the "expert" after all. But sometimes the best you can do is sit back and do damage control after the fact.
Oh yes, some will want a certain type of advice but they still want the consultant to tell them that. But it seems to me that the idea here is that if the best you can do is wait for a chance to do damage control then you should try somewhere else.
It seems like you could hire someone to tell you you're right for much less than the cost of a consultant, though, since they wouldn't actually need to be any sort of domain expert.
Very often people are intent on doing something that seems stupid to you, but smart to them. In that situation they really don't want to be told that they are wrong and the best thing you can do is stand nearby, ready to dial 911.
Sometimes the only "right" response is "I would not have thought of doing it that way. What can I do to help you make it go well?"