Why do governments rely on coercion and punishment when voluntary cooperation often produces better, more sustainable outcomes?

Episode Summary
On this episode, I’m joined once again by Professor Yuval Feldman, who returns to explore the core question behind his latest book: Can The Public Be Trusted?

Instead of asking how much we trust our governments, Yuval flips the script, asking how much governments trust us, and whether that trust is deserved. Together, we dive into the concept of voluntary compliance, where people follow rules not because they’re forced to, but because they believe in doing the right thing. We unpack the complexity of this idea through real-world examples, from tax compliance to environmental policy to COVID-19 interventions. 

Yuval explains why people who think they’re ethical can actually be the hardest to regulate, and how misplaced trust can lead to serious regulatory blind spots. We also explore the psychological tension between intrinsic motivation and external enforcement, and why regulators often default to command-and-control, even when trust might offer a better solution.

As ever, Yuval makes nuanced, sophisticated ideas feel accessible and immediately relevant. You'll hear about the role of culture, the limits of nudging, why economists might (sometimes!) actually be right about human behaviour and how AI might help policymakers make better decisions. 



Guest Bio
Professor Yuval Feldman is a legal scholar and behavioural scientist at Bar-Ilan University in Israel. A returning guest and the podcast’s very first interviewee, Yuval is internationally renowned for his work at the intersection of law, psychology, and behavioural economics. His new book, Can The Public Be Trusted? The Promise and Perils of Voluntary Compliance is available open-access via Cambridge University Press (link below).

AI-Generated Timestamped Summary
[00:00:00] Introduction: why this question of “can the public be trusted?” matters for regulation and risk

[00:03:42] Yuval’s personal background: how he came into law + psychology and the origin of his VComp lab

[00:09:15] Defining voluntary compliance: what it means, how it differs from coercion

[00:14:52] Intrinsic motivation vs crowding out: when good intentions are undermined by heavy‑handed regulation

[00:21:30] Designing regulatory systems for trust: frameworks and features that support voluntary compliance

[00:27:47] Case study: Covid‑19 and public cooperation—what we learned about trust, compliance and enforcement

[00:34:10] Tax compliance as a trust test: how citizens respond when they believe the system treats them fairly

[00:39:58] Environmental regulation and the limits of voluntary strategies: when culture or technology create barriers

[00:45:22] Cross‑cultural & technological dynamics: how digital reputation, culture and platforms impact compliance

[00:50:05] The perils of voluntary compliance: when trust can be misplaced, manipulated or simply ineffective

[00:55:30] Final reflections: what this means for risk professionals, policymakers and anyone designing systems of human behaviour

[01:00:12] Closing: how to reframe regulation to see the public not as a risk but as a resource.

Links
Yuval's academic profile -  https://law.biu.ac.il/en/feldman

His profile on LinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/in/yuval-feldman-21942514/
 
His open-access book Can the Public Be Trusted? (Cambridge University Press) – https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/can-the-public-be-trusted/B3E11831E3051D4E928B9252B6767A4B


Yuval’s previous appearances on the show 
On The Law of Good People or ‘why we should write rules for good people not bad people’ (2019) - https://www.humanriskpodcast.com/professor-yuval-feldman-on-why/
 
On Trust & Voluntary Compliance (2022) - https://www.humanriskpodcast.com/professor-yuval-feldman-on-trust-compliance?

We all intuitively know that hypocrisy is a bad thing. But what if it isn’t a flaw, but a feature? But maybe the real problem isn’t hypocrisy, it’s how we think about it.

Episode Summary
On this episode, I'm talking to Dr Michael Hallsworth, a leading behavioural scientist and the author of The Hypocrisy Trap. We explore a topic that’s instantly recognisable but not often properly understood. Hypocrisy is something we’re quick to spot in others, slow to acknowledge in ourselves, and often design around as if it were avoidable or inherently wrong. 

What Michael reveals — through personal stories, behavioural experiments, and a careful unpacking of what hypocrisy really means — is that our judgments of hypocrisy say more about us than about the people we’re criticising. In fact, hypocrisy isn’t just common; it’s structurally baked into how we navigate competing priorities, conflicting values and real-world trade-offs. And sometimes, paradoxically, a little hypocrisy might even be useful.

That makes it incredibly relevant to human risk. In compliance, ethics, and organisational culture, we tend to assume people should act consistently with what they believe, and we often penalise them when they don’t. But as Michael explains, this assumption can lead us to build systems that are brittle, punitive or out of touch with how people actually behave. This conversation challenges that frame and offers a more human — and more effective — way of thinking about inconsistency, trust and moral judgment.

Guest Biography - Michael Hallsworth
Dr Michael Hallsworth is Chief Behavioural Scientist at the Behavioural Insights Team (BIT), where he applies behavioural science to policy, organisational design and real‑world behavioural change. He describes himself as someone “helping people apply behavioural science to real‑world problems” and is the author of The Hypocrisy Trap: How Changing What We Criticise Can Improve Our Lives.

At BIT, Michael has led numerous projects spanning government and private sector domains, bridging rigorous academic research with operational behavioural insight. His work is characterised by practical translation of behavioural science and an upfront acknowledgement of human complexity — the grey zones rather than the simple binaries.

His new book brings this lens to the topic of hypocrisy, exploring how our judgments of double standards shape behaviour, institutions and trust in counter‑intuitive ways.

AI-Generated Timestamp Summary
[00:00:00] Intro and framing of hypocrisy as a human behavioural risk
[00:01:00] Why hypocrisy runs deeper than just “saying one thing and doing another”
[00:02:00] Discussion of how organisations treat moral consistency — and the limitations of that approach
[00:03:00] Michael’s background, BIT and the genesis of his book
[00:04:00] Defining hypocrisy: the three‑part structure
[00:06:00] The two‑fold meaning: false image vs double standards
[00:07:00] Michael’s personal story with his daughter + the context of “PartyGate”
[00:09:00] Historical roots: Freud’s view on civilisation and hypocrisy
[00:11:00] Why hypocrisy is a social judgement rather than purely behavioural
[00:13:00] When calling out hypocrisy becomes counterproductive in change efforts
[00:15:00] Real‑world examples: politics, business, everyday life
[00:17:00] The phenomenon of ‘do‑gooder derogation’ and why consistent people make us uneasy
[00:20:00] Hypocrisy as a strategic accusation in social media and organisational life
[00:22:00] The behavioural science of induced hypocrisy and what it tells us about change
[00:25:00] Honest vs. relatable hypocrisy: shifting the narrative
[00:28:00] Michael outlines three categories for navigating hypocrisy
[00:30:00] His reflections on writing the book and the surprises he uncovered
[00:34:00] Balancing moral integrity with public perception and stakeholder expectations
[00:36:00] Hypocrisy in corporate ESG: the tension between expectation and action
[00:39:00] Managing contradictions among stakeholders: the inevitable trade‑offs
[00:41:00] Experiment results: private hypocrisy and moral judge
[00:44:00] The paradox: why we prefer people who are ‘inconsistent but principled’ over ‘consistent and bland’
[00:46:00] Authenticity vs inauthentic leadership — and the hypocrisy dimension
[00:48:00] Is this a practical manual for “how to do hypocrisy well”?
[00:51:00] Final reflections: hypocrisy isn’t always about morality—sometimes it’s about signalling, trust and change
[00:54:00] Michael’s hope for what the book can achieve and closing thoughts
[00:57:00] Wrap‑up, thanks and behavioural nudge for the listener

Links
Michael's website - https://www.michaelhallsworth.com/
The Hypocrisy Trap  – https://www.thehypocrisytrap.com/
Behavioural Insights Team - https://www.bi.team/
Michael's IT profile – https://www.bi.team/people/michael-hallsworth/
'Partygate' explainer - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-59952395 

Can a single sentence change the way you see the world? My guest on this episode, James Geary thinks so.

Episode Summary
On this episode, I speak with writer and journalist James, whose lifelong fascination with aphorisms — the world’s shortest literary form — reveals why brevity really is the soul of wit.

James explains what makes an aphorism work, shares the five laws that define them, and explores how these concise little sayings have guided human thought from ancient times to social media.

We discuss:

• The difference between aphorisms and proverbs
• How short phrases can serve as decision-making tools and emotional signposts
• Why humour and contradiction are central to wisdom
• How modern culture, marketing, and even AI continue the aphoristic tradition
• James’s book The World in a Phrase and why he chose to update it 20 years after originally publishing it

I also ask him whether my friend James Victore's phrase 'what made you weird as a kid, makes you great today' is an aphorism (spoiler alert: it is!).

Guest bio
James Geary is a writer, journalist, and Deputy Curator at Harvard’s Nieman Foundation for Journalism. He is the author of 'The World in a Phrase: A Brief History of the Aphorism' and 'Geary’s Guide to the World’s Great Aphorists'.

Links to topics 

• James' book The World in a Phrase: A Brief History of the Aphorism (Second Edition) — University of Chicago Press page. University of Chicago Press
• James' official website (book + aphorism archive). jamesgeary.com+1
• Harvard Gazette profile piece (“Brief bursts of wisdom”). Harvard Gazette
• James Geary — TED Talk “Metaphorically speaking.” TED
• Earlier Human Risk podcast episode with James Victore (where he shares “the things that made you weird…”): The Human Risk Podcast

AI-Generated Timestamp Summary
[00:00:00] Opening, why short phrases stick; introducing James Geary and my confession about “aphorism” pronunciation and definition.

[00:01:00] What aphorisms are; oldest literary form; Reader’s Digest spark at age eight.
 
[00:03:00] First memorable line: “difference between a rut and a grave”; why compressing meaning captivated him. 

[00:05:00] The five laws: brief, personal, definitive, philosophical, with a twist; applying them to the Victore quote.
 
[00:06:30] Truth vs. usefulness; contradictions (Johnson vs. Bierce) and situational wisdom.
 
[00:08:45] Aphorisms as everyday philosophy; “signposts” and “violin in public” imagery.
 
[00:10:45] Teenage collecting; writing aphorisms on the backs of rock posters.
 
[00:12:45] Joy + darkness; why humour helps memory; “Why can angels fly? Because they take themselves lightly.”
 
[00:16:30] Family sayings; “If you’re not living on the edge, you’re taking up too much space.”
 
[00:17:45] Redundancy story; “treacherous ground” aphorism as psychological footing.
 
[00:19:30] Secular scripture; Pascal’s tennis metaphor; timelessness across traditions.
 
[00:23:00] Originality vs. recurrence; why the twist makes the familiar new.
 
[00:25:15] Beyond greeting-card obviousness; Emerson’s “braver five minutes longer.”
 
[00:27:45] Knowing when to persist vs. bail; relationship aphorism “don’t let someone show you twice.”
 
[00:31:00] Short form ≠ short attention; links to deep, long thinking.
 
[00:33:30] Craft vs. hot takes; how aphorisms provoke contemplation and dialogue.
 
[00:37:00] Ukraine example; “We kneel before heroes, not invaders” and words+images.
 
[00:41:00] Free speech, calm strength, and the form’s defiance of authoritarianism.
 
[00:43:15] Why a history, not a favourites list; posters to book structure.
 
[00:47:00] Rights reversion; why a new edition now; social media context; more aphorists.
 
[00:49:15] Choosing figures: omitting Wilde; championing Stanisław Lec; “No snowflake in an avalanche ever feels responsible.”
 
[00:53:00] Aphorisms everywhere: t-shirts, bumper stickers, ads; “Lick the lid of life.”
 
[00:56:30] Can AI write aphorisms? Yes — but beware “cognitive laziness.”
 
[01:01:00] Prompts for humans vs. prompts for machines; why discomfort matters.
 
[01:02:15] Book details; publisher; where to find it; closing thanks.
 
[01:04:00] Outro: links, review ask, website, and final behavioural nudge on “phrases you live by.”

What can war teach us about how the human brain really works? And why is human decision-making a more significant factor than military strength in wars?

Episode Summary
On this episode, I'm exploring how the human brain truly manifests in conflict—and what that reveals about everyday decision-making. Dr Nicholas Wright, a neurologist-turned-neuroscientist who advises the Pentagon Joint Staff, joins me to discuss his new book Warhead: How the Brain Shapes War and War Shapes the Brain.

In our conversation, Nick explains why fear is functional, how “will to fight” can outweigh superior force, and why democracies remain capable of catastrophic decisions. He also explains how perception operates as a controlled hallucination anchored to reality rather than a simple sensory feed, and why that distinction matters for strategy, leadership, and risk. 

Moving from fruit flies to front lines, Nick shows how simple neural chemicals regulate aggression, how the brain’s grid cells create literal maps to navigate danger and opportunity, and how both biological and organisational models can mislead when mistaken for reality. The discussion ranges from 1940 France to Kyiv, from Stalingrad to Gaza, and from deception as a vice to deception as a civic virtue.

Nick makes a compelling case for metacognition — the ability to think about one’s own thinking— as the conductor of the brain’s internal orchestra and argues that wisdom—not merely cleverness — must be deliberately designed into leaders and into the next generation of artificial intelligence.

We end with practical insights: cultivating “better ignorance,” inviting real dissent in the spirit of Churchill, and creating deliberate spaces for reflection like (I'm delighted to report) long train journeys.

Guest Biography
Dr Nicholas Wright, MRCP, PhD, is a neuroscientist researching the intersections of the brain, technology, and security at University College London, Georgetown University, and the Center for Strategic & International Studies in Washington, DC. He also serves as an adviser to the Pentagon Joint Staff. Beyond academia, Wright leads projects connecting neuroscience, artificial intelligence, and strategy, and has advised the Pentagon Joint Staff for more than a decade.

He consults on AI for SAP and edited Artificial Intelligence, China, Russia, and the Global Order (Air University Press, 2019).

His latest book, Warhead: How the Brain Shapes War and War Shapes the Brain, is published by St. Martin’s Press (US) and Pan Macmillan (UK).

AI_Generated Time-stamped Summary
[00:00:00] Introduction 
[00:01:00] Nick Wright’s journey from neurologist to defense advisor, applying neuroscience to strategy and AI.
[00:04:29] How evolution shaped the human brain for survival and combat — we’re “built to win or survive a fight.”
[00:05:59] Fear as a vital yet double-edged emotion; anxiety as a side effect of peace.
[00:08:26] Origins of the book Warhead and cultural perceptions of its title.
[00:09:39] Why war remains relevant; critique of overconfidence in peace and Pinker’s “Better Angels” thesis.
[00:12:01] Lessons from France’s WWII defeat — cognition and morale outweigh material strength.
[00:14:41] Ukraine’s resistance as an example of will to fight; psychology as a decisive factor.
[00:15:42] Creativity and emotion as essential tools in decision-making; the brain as an orchestra balancing logic and instinct.
[00:18:10] What fruit flies reveal about aggression and shared neural circuitry with humans.
[00:21:13] Structure of Warhead — using neuroscience to reinterpret history and warfare.
[00:26:37] Mental models and how the brain simulates reality to guide choices.
[00:30:37] Perception vs. reality — the brain generates, not records, the world we see.
[00:35:31] The “uncanny valley” and prediction errors — why imperfect mimicry unsettles us.
[00:36:17] Moral symmetry in conflict — both sides perceive their cause as just.
[00:38:00] Deception and fog of war — manipulating human perception as a timeless weapon.
[00:41:00] WWII story of René Carmille — lying as moral resistance.
[00:43:59] Social media, attention, and the loss of reflection — the modern “disease of abundance.”
[00:45:41] Wisdom versus cleverness — Churchill’s reflective habits and valuing dissent.
[00:48:11] “Better ignorance” and intellectual humility as foundations of wise leadership.
[00:51:26] Cognitive diversity, AI, and the need to embed wisdom—not just intelligence—into machines.
[00:58:28] From WWII to China today — the enduring need for wisdom in navigating global conflict.

Links
Nick's website - https://www.intelligentbiology.co.uk/

WarHead Nick's book - https://www.intelligentbiology.co.uk/books

Nick on LinkedIn -  https://www.linkedin.com/in/nicholas-d-wright-bba3a065/

If you liked this episode, you might also like my discussion with Dr Mike Martin - https://www.humanriskpodcast.com/dr-mike-martin-on-war-politics/

What if your body is learning things your mind doesn’t know? What if memory wasn't just something that our brain has?

Episode Summary 
On this episode, I'm exploring a bold idea with neuroscientist Dr Nikolay Kukushkin: memory doesn’t just live in the brain. It might be a basic property of life itself. We unpack how scientists define memory (behavioural change over time) versus how the rest of us use the word, and why that distinction matters—from sea slugs to kidney cells. I ask the “muscle memory” question we all carry, and we separate the metaphor from the biology: your basal ganglia automate behaviours, but your muscle cells do literally adapt to patterned use.

We go deep on “patterns.” Nikolay’s work shows that even non-neural cells can detect minute-scale timing differences—preferring spaced pulses over a single crammed dose. That has huge implications for learning, exercise, nutrition, and even medicine; it suggests timing might be as important as quantity. We also talk about sleep as essential “synaptic housekeeping,” why false memories are an adaptive feature (not a failure), and what it really means to “run out of memory” in our overstimulated world.

Finally, we tilt at the big questions: how consciousness might have evolved, why Plato’s model of perception eerily echoes today’s top-down/bottom-up neuroscience, and what AI still lacks—learning patterns in time within an embodied world. If you’ve ever crammed for an exam, worried about forgetting your own name, or wondered what your cells are quietly learning from your daily routines, this one will rewire how you think about memory.

Guest Biography — Dr Nikolay Kukushkin
Dr Nikolay Kukushkin is a Clinical Associate Professor at NYU. His book One Hand Clapping: Unraveling the Mystery of the Human Mind  traces how consciousness emerged from the natural world; the original Russian edition won the Enlightener (Prosvetitel) Award and the Alexander Belyaev Medal.

His recent research (Nature Communications, Nov 2024) showed that non-neural human cells display the classic “spacing effect,” suggesting memory-like temporal patterning beyond the brain.

AI-Generated Timestamped Summary 
[00:00:00] Cold open: reframing memory as cellular, not just neural.
[00:01:00] Scientists’ definition of memory vs everyday usage.
[00:03:00] From behaviour change to cellular change; beyond “plugging a muscle into a brain.”
[00:05:00] All cells have experiences; “pattern matters.”
[00:06:00] Muscle memory: basal ganglia automation vs literal muscle adaptation.
[00:07:00] Shared molecular machinery: “use it or lose it” in brain and muscle.
[00:08:00] Nikolay’s path: from molecules to minds; bottom-up neuroscience.
[00:09:00] Protein quality control: molecular barcodes and cellular “conversations.”
[00:11:00] Why sea slugs: short path from molecules to behaviour.
[00:13:00] Hypothesis leap: if single neurons learn from pulses, could kidney cells?
[00:14:00] The experiment: four 3-min pulses vs one 12-min pulse (spacing wins).
[00:16:00] What’s uniquely neural: synapses and specific connectivity; where salience arises.
[00:19:00] Memory without awareness; non-neural systems can store patterns.
[00:20:00] Applications: exercise, diet, medicine; timing as a lever.
[00:23:00] The dark mirror: life as obsessive optimisation if we over-pattern.
[00:24:00] Personal practice: being mindful of inputs, attention as filter.
[00:26:00] Debunking “10% of the brain” and the sleep–memory link.
[00:28:00] Sleep weakens synapses; deprivation leads to saturation and hallucinations.
[00:30:00] The social-media “soup” analogy for saturated memory.
[00:32:00] Names, identity and rehearsal; de-naming as degradation.
[00:33:00] Reconsolidation: why false memories are a feature we need.
[00:34:00] 9/11/Challenger studies: how memories drift with time.
[00:36:00] Ebbinghaus and the spacing effect across species and systems.
[00:39:00] Cramming vs spacing: initial strength and decay rates.
[00:41:00] The forgetting curve and why “more” can decay slower in memory.
[00:42:00] “My whole life is one big experiment on my brain.”
[00:43:00] Practical “tip”: fix attention first; follow interest, not force.
[00:45:00] Attention economy and selective inputs as memory hygiene.
[00:48:00] From smoking to scrolling: a future of information hygiene.
[00:50:00] One Hand Clapping: why it feels special to be you.
[00:54:00] Plato’s “two fires”: ancient echoes of top-down/bottom-up perception.
[00:58:00] Intuition as hidden associations; LLMs as an analogy.
[01:00:00] AI: excitement, unease, and the risk of outsourcing humanness.
[01:03:00] What AI lacks: learning patterns in time without a body.
[01:05:00] Close and thanks.
[01:06:00] Outro and calls to action.

Links
Nikolay's website - https://www.nikolaykukushkin.com/


His NYC profile - https://liberalstudies.nyu.edu/about/faculty-listing/nikolay-kukushkin.html

His book 'One Hand Clapping' - https://www.nikolaykukushkin.com/press-1

'Memory Takes Time': research into how wemory is not confined to a particular location or locations in the brain - https://www.cell.com/neuron/fulltext/S0896-62731730467-1

Herman Ebbinghaus - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermann_Ebbinghaus and The Ebbinghaus Illusion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ebbinghaus_illusion

What if the biggest AI risk isn’t bias or data, but human behaviour itself? How might AI impact the people using it and what does that mean for how we design solutions and deploy the technology?

Episode Summary
On this episode, I’m joined by a returning guest.  Richard Chataway is a behavioural science expert and strategist who joins me to explore how we can design AI systems that truly work for humans. Richard brings a unique lens to the conversation, combining insights from advertising, government policy, and behavioural science to unpack the human drivers that shape how we build and interact with AI. We discuss everything from cognitive biases and persuasive tech to the ethics of design and how these hidden forces influence our relationship with intelligent machines.

During our conversation, Richard explains the importance of context and behavioural frameworks in making AI more ethical, effective, and human-centric. We explore real-world examples of effective and ineffective design, examining where intentions diverge from outcomes and what can be done to address these discrepancies. 

Richard shares fascinating insights from his book "The Behaviour Business" and his experience in both the public and private sectors, offering a practical yet thought-provoking look at what it really means to design for behaviour in the age of AI.
Whether you’re an AI sceptic, enthusiast, or simply curious about how technology intersects with human behaviour, this episode offers a compelling exploration of the invisible levers shaping our digital lives. From nudging with intent to avoiding manipulation, Richard helps us understand how behavioural science can make the future of AI more aligned with our values and less prone to unintended consequences.

Guest Biography
Richard is a Behavioural Scientist, Author and Podcaster who heads up the Behaviour Change Team at Concentrix, a Fortune 500 global technology and transformation company, working with around 2000 brands globally in over 70 different countries. He is also the founder of Communication Science Group and a former board member of the Association for Business Psychology. 

His book The Behaviour Business is a bestselling guide to deploying Behavioural Science within organisations to solve a wide range of problems. 

vAI-Generated Timestamped Summary
00:00 – Intro: Designing AI for humans
01:25 – Welcome back Richard Chataway
03:15 – Behavioural science meets AI
05:20 – Why we lie more to bots
07:05 – Judgement, distance & dishonesty
09:10 – When design invites bad behaviour
11:30 – Fraud as a design problem
13:40 – The “Computer says no” effect
15:25 – When neutrality helps disclosure
17:15 – The empathy paradox
19:05 – Data bias & unequal outcomes
21:30 – When to keep humans in the loop
23:40 – Behavioural science as AI insurance
26:00 – When efficiency erodes trust
28:20 – Friction, fairness & feedback
30:05 – AI and the frontline worker
33:00 – Redefining jobs, not removing them
36:10 – New skills for an AI world
39:00 – Beyond efficiency: meaningful work
41:45 – Leadership: ask “should we automate?”
44:10 – Practical design principles
47:30 – The myth of full automation
50:20 – Augment, don’t replace
53:00 – Case studies from Concentrix
56:40 – Making AI ethics actionable
59:20 – The next five years of human-centred AI
1:02:00 – Closing reflections
1:04:30 – Where to find Richard
1:06:00 – Outro & related episodes

Links
Richard on LinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/in/richard-chataway/

Richard's book The Behaviour Business - https://behaviourbusiness.com/

Richard's previous appearance on the show - https://www.humanriskpodcast.com/richard-chataway-on-the-behaviour/

Concentrix - https://www.concentrix.com/

Richard at Concentrix - https://www.concentrix.com/contributor/richard-chataway/

What happens when the worst thing you’ve ever done becomes the foundation for your life’s work?

Episode Summary
My guest on this episode is Tom Hardin, otherwise known as Tipper X.  He's been on the show before, but this time we're tackling a different angle.

If you don’t already know his story, Tom was a rising star in the hedge fund world in his twenties when he became involved in insider trading. Caught by the FBI, he made the decision to cooperate — ultimately becoming one of the most prolific informants in the largest investigation of its kind in U.S. history. His work with the FBI helped secure dozens of convictions, and while his own case remained under seal for years, he eventually chose to speak publicly about what happened — not to excuse it, but to help others understand how good people can make bad decisions.

If you haven’t heard Tom’s first appearance on the show, where he tells that extraordinary story in full, I highly recommend listening to it here before diving into this episode.

Because this time, we’re not talking about what he did back then; we’re talking about what he’s done since. Tom has built a powerful second act, using his experience to educate organisations about ethics, decision-making and behavioural risk. He’s now delivered over 600 talks, and what fascinates me is how he’s turned that into something both impactful and sustainable.

His forthcoming book Wired on Wall Street is due out next year, and he’ll be back on the show to talk about that. But for now, I wanted to explore what it means to build a career from a cautionary tale. In this conversation, we explore:

• How Tom built a speaking business around his past without glamourising it
• The frameworks he’s developed to help companies recognise ethical pressure points
• How he navigates scepticism, manages reputation, and avoids turning his story into a performance
• The impact he hopes to have, and how he measures it

This is a conversation about vulnerability, professionalism, and doing good with what you’ve learned the hard way. Whether you're in compliance, leadership, education, or just curious about how we turn failure into purpose, this one’s for you.

Guest Profile
Tom is a former hedge fund analyst turned FBI informant, now a globally recognised speaker and ethics educator. Known as Tipper X, Tom shares his story to help others understand the behavioural drivers of misconduct and the power of accountability. 

AI Generated Timestamped Summary
00:00 – Introduction
Christian shares the origin of this episode, his relationship with Tom, and the context behind the conversation.

06:30 – The label “Tipper X” and living with it
Tom reflects on how it feels to be known by his code name and why he uses it professionally.

09:00 – What it’s like to talk about the worst thing you’ve done, repeatedly
The emotional and psychological toll of speaking publicly about past wrongdoing.

13:00 – Keeping it fresh: updating the story and the message
How Tom avoids becoming performative and ensures audiences always get something valuable.

16:40 – Why it’s not entertainment
Tom draws the line between education and storytelling-as-performance, and how he avoids glamorising his past.

20:50 – The business model behind Tipper X
The practicalities of how Tom has built and sustained a speaking career rooted in his past.

26:30 – Frameworks and tools Tom uses in his talks
He discusses behavioural insights and models he shares with audiences to make the message stick.

31:00 – The “AI homework” story
A compelling example Tom uses to explain rationalisation and ethical grey areas.

36:00 – Over 630 talks: managing the workload and the mission
How Tom tracks his talks and why he keeps going despite the repetition.

39:10 – Audience reactions and confessions
What people tell Tom after his talks — and what that reveals about corporate culture.

42:30 – “Why should we pay someone who committed a crime?”
Christian and Tom unpack this ethical tension and why context, intent and delivery matter.

48:00 – Building trust with clients and collaborators
The importance of transparency, humility and boundaries in how Tom presents himself.

53:20 – What success really looks like
Tom reflects on purpose, legacy and the long-term impact he hopes to have.

57:00 – Looking ahead: the forthcoming book and continuing the conversation. Christian mentions Tom’s upcoming book Wired on Wall Street, and plans for a future episode.

Links
Podcast: Tom’s previous appearance on the show

Tom's website: TipperX.com

Pre-order Tom's book Wired On Wall Street; https://www.amazon.com/Wired-Wall-Street-Prolific-Informants/dp/1394348878

His LinkedIn profile: https://www.linkedin.com/in/tipperx/

Tom's Substack Newsletter: https://tipperx.substack.com/

Why do so many workplaces run on bullshit processes and procedures?  And how might Behavioural Science help resolve them?

Episode Summary
In this episode, I sit down with author, speaker and advisor James Healy to explore his book BS at Work — and the everyday nonsense we all recognise inside organisations.

James argues that while behavioural science has transformed public policy and consumer behaviour, workplaces have lagged behind. We dig into why leaders keep choosing rituals over results, why nobody seems to ask “does this actually work?”, and how our search for simple answers can make complex systems worse.

I ask James to unpack some of his favourite stories, including the strange origins of the DISC personality test — created by Wonder Woman’s inventor, complete with “dominance” and “submission” baked in — and the utterly self-parodying experience he had with e-learning about not cheating on e-learning. 😳

We talk context vs. character, box-ticking vs. behaviour change, and why “I don’t know” is often the most honest answer in big organisations. We finish on what to do instead. James doesn’t offer commandments — he offers principles that sometimes even contradict each other, because context matters.

Together we make the case for designing environments that make the desired behaviours easier, embracing complexity with humility, and asking better questions — especially when a shiny quick fix is on the table.

GUEST BIO
James is an author, speaker and executive advisor who applies behavioural science to organisational problems — with a mission to make workplaces more human. He's also the Founder and Managing Director of The Behaviour Boutique and host of The B-Word podcast, 

AI-GENERATED TIMESTAMPED SUMMARY
[00:00:00] Introduction 
[00:03:00] James’s path: economics → philosophy → Kahneman & Tversky lightbulb.
[00:06:00] The question James asks in orgs: “Does anybody think this will work?”
[00:09:00] The missing third answer: “I don’t know” — and why nobody measures impact.
[00:10:30] Why people stick with accepted rituals; self-preservation beats candour.
[00:13:30] The book’s stance: no silver bullets; principles, not commandments.
[00:16:00] Personality tests & categories; the DISC backstory via Wonder Woman.
[00:20:00] Humans on continua, not binaries; our craving for neat boxes.
[00:23:00] Complexity rising; we cling harder to simplicity and widen the gap.
[00:24:30] The brain’s connectome as humility check; limits of two-by-two thinking.
[00:27:00] Context > character; orgs try to “fix the individual” instead of the system.
[00:29:00] Mixed signals: “be collaborative” vs. incentives and spaghetti systems.
[00:34:00] AI and magical thinking; processes are simple “except for all the ways they’re not.”
[00:41:00] Call-centre scripts vs. common sense — when design defeats judgment.
[00:45:00] Purpose theatre: the Greggs poster and the risk of making things worse.
[00:51:00] The e-learning about not cheating on e-learning; incentives and signals.
[00:55:00] “Do something” bias (Geldof); why activity ≠ effectiveness in orgs.
[01:00:00] Failure as feature; thinking critically beats imported “models.”
[01:01:00] Book and podcast details; where to find James.

LINKS
James on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/james-healy-behaviour-boutique

James' website for his business The Behaviour Boutique:  https://thebehaviourboutique.com/

James' Book BS At Work: Why so much of modern work is bullshit and how behavioural science can make it better  - https://www.amazon.co.uk/BS-At-Work-bullshit-behavioural/dp/0646719173?ref_=ast_author_dp

James' Podcast The B Word - https://thebehaviourboutique.com/podcast/

What if the most powerful tool at work isn’t logic, but laughter? On this episode I'm speaking to a comedian who far from thinking humour is a workplace distraction, thinks it might be one of our most powerful tools. 

Episode Summary
My guest is Pep Rosenfeld: comedian, improviser, and co-founder of the Amsterdam-based comedy institution Boom Chicago. He’s also the author of Work Laugh Balance, a manifesto for injecting humour into the working world. We explore why humour matters; not just as entertainment, but as a serious enabler of collaboration, communication, and honesty. Pep brings a unique perspective: part performer, part business trainer. 

We talk about how Boom Chicago went from late-night improv to a launchpad for corporate masterclasses in leadership and presentation. Along the way, we unpack the risks and rewards of using humour at work; what works, what really doesn’t, and how to find the line without crossing it. Pep shares ethical guidelines for office jokes, the power of self-deprecation, and why starting with a laugh can lead to deeper conversations. We also get into the craft of being funny.

Pep explains why good comedy is rarely spontaneous, why AI still can’t tell a decent joke, and why live audiences matter more than ever. Whether you're trying to lighten the mood in a meeting or name the elephant in the room without causing a stampede, this episode offers practical ideas (and a few laughs) on how to do it with intelligence and care.

AI-Generated Timestamped Summary
[00:00:00] Opening on humour’s overlooked role in work; intro to Pep Rosenfeld
[00:01:00] How Boom Chicago began as a summer comedy project in Amsterdam
[00:04:00] Expanding into improv for kids on the autism spectrum
[00:06:00] The book’s premise: humour fuels communication, leadership, and trust
[00:11:00] Why advertisers and leaders alike should embrace humour
[00:12:00] Rules for workplace humour: self-deprecate, avoid punching down, don’t get creepy
[00:16:00] Comedy as a tool for tackling elephants in the room
[00:23:00] The myth of improv: strong humor depends on thoughtful prep
[00:26:00] The power of presence and live attention in comedy
[00:33:00] What comedians offer that motivational speakers don’t
[00:36:00] How Pep uses AI to show the limits of artificial humour
[00:41:00] Using comedy to defuse fear and build connection
[00:44:00] Parallel skills: being a lawyer vs. being a comedian
[00:50:00] The energy difference between live and virtual comedy
[00:55:00] Defining Work Laugh Balance: credibility without sterility
[01:00:00] What’s next for Pep, where to find his work, and closing thoughts

Links
Pep on LinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/in/pep-rosenfeld-394b2424/
Boom Chicago, Pep's Amsterdam comedy club - https://boomchicago.nl/
Work Laugh Balance - https://amzn.eu/d/678xGYN

If you eniyed this episode, then you might also like these previous episodes of the show:

Comedy writer Paul Dornan on Being Truly Funny - https://www.humanriskpodcast.com/paul-dornan-on-being-truly-funny/
Improv Comedian Neil Mullarkey on Being In The Moment - https://www.humanriskpodcast.com/neil-mullarkey-on-being-in-the-moment/
Impressionist Josh Berry on Comedy, Satire and Impressions - https://www.humanriskpodcast.com/josh-berry-on-comedy-satire-impressions-part-one/

Why do cyclists in London run red lights? It's against the law, and yet, if you've cycled, driven or just observed London's cyclists, you'll know that many of them don't stop when there's a red light. 

Confession time: I'm one of them. Not all the time, but some of the time, and weirdly not when I'm in Munich — the other city I live in — but only in London.

The question of why this happens — not just my red light running, but the act in general — is the subject of this episode. Because I think this seemingly simple act can reveal so much about our compliance with rules, our perception of risk, and the way environments shape behaviour.

To unpack these insights, I’m joined by Ella Jenkins, Associate Director at Thinks Insight, and Pete Dyson, a behavioural science researcher at the University of Bath and co-author of Transport for Humans.  They've been part of a research team on a study commissioned by Lime, the electric bike and scooter company, which explores why cyclists in London behave the way they do.

What we discover isn’t about recklessness—it’s about confidence, social signalling, poor infrastructure, and the surprising psychology of compliance. In our conversation, we examine the drivers of red-light running, the effectiveness of different interventions, and what this means for broader behaviour change.

Whether you’re a policymaker, a cyclist, or simply someone curious about how our minds and cities interact, this episode offers practical insights into one of the most visible — and misunderstood — forms of everyday noncompliance.

Guest Biographies
Ella Jenkins is an Associate Director at Thinks Insight, a strategy and research consultancy that helps clients understand human behaviour and deliver change. She led the research project commissioned by Lime to understand why cyclists in London run red lights. With a background in behavioural science and a passion for applying insights in real-world contexts, Ella brings both analytical rigour and empathy to her work.

Pete Dyson is a behavioural science researcher at the University of Bath, where he focuses on transport systems and human behaviour. He is the co-author with Rory Sutherland of the influential book Transport for Humans: Are we nearly there yet? and previously served as the Principal Behavioural Scientist at the UK Department for Transport. He's also the current Cycling Mayor for the UK City of Bath.

Pete blends practical policymaking experience with a deep understanding of the behavioural levers that shape how we move through the world.

AI-Generated Timestamped Summary
[00:00:00] Introduction and personal confession about red-light running
[00:01:15] Overview of the Lime-commissioned research 
[00:03:20] Introducing Ella Jenkins and Pete Dyson
[00:05:45] The origins and goals of the study
[00:09:05] Red-light running as a defensive rather than reckless behaviour
[00:12:08] Confidence and frequency of cycling linked to rule-breaking
[00:13:14] Perceptions versus reality of who breaks the rules
[00:16:32] The role of infrastructure and signal phasing
[00:18:54] Social norms and peer influence on cyclist behaviour
[00:21:46] Trust in the rules versus lived reality 
[00:24:20] Designing for behavioural cues
[00:28:15] Comparison with other cities like Munich 
[00:30:58] The emotional context of cycling
[00:34:46] Enforcement and views on potential interventions
[00:38:12] Habit formation and unintended nudges 
[00:41:23] The interplay between education and empathy
[00:46:49] Final reflections and Christian's closing thoughts

Links
Ella on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ella-jenkins/

Pete on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/pete-dyson-9ba5301b/

What drives red light running in London cyclists?, the research we discuss: https://fileserver.britainthinks.com/dl/wH4CcDyRg8bV

Thinks Insight: https://www.thinksinsight.com/

Lime Bikes: https://www.li.me/en-gb

Transport for Humans: https://www.transportforhumans.com/

Pete's previous appearance on the show talking about Transport for Humans: https://www.humanriskpodcast.com/pete-dyson-on-making-transport-more-human/

The announcement of Pete as Cycling Mayor of Bath: https://www.bath.ac.uk/announcements/the-bicycle-mayor-of-bath-pete-dyson/