The In-House Ethicist

Money can buy you a lot of nice things, but what about when its power goes beyond the ability to purchase a penthouse or a Porsche? When money allows us to buy non-material goods – such as status, power, or personal advancement – how does it change the way we look at ourselves and how we decide to spend our days? In this episode of the In-House Ethicist, John Paul Rollert draws on a wide array of economists and philosophers to explore what it means to live in a world where money can seemingly buy everything. He considers not only how this changes our understanding of non-material goods, like honor and self-esteem, but also how it shapes the stories we tell ourselves about what really constitutes our self-interest.

Trust is crucial in commercial transactions. We want to know if the people we do business with are reliable, but if we don't know them personally, how can we be so sure that we should trust the individual on the other side of the negotiating table or the shop counter? In this episode of the In-House Ethicist, John Paul Rollert takes up questions of trust in business, a matter he became attuned to after a very unpleasant trip to the dentist. He shares his story and takes an historic look at how early proponents of capitalism dealt with questions of trust. He also examines whether Yelp and other social media services have helped to solve the problem of "buyer beware" in business.  

When it comes to marketing, negotiations, and salesmanship, companies seem to tolerate a lot of what we might call "little white lies." Does such permissiveness say something essential about business, or does it say more about the type of people who typically conduct it? In this episode of the In-House Ethicist, John Paul Rollert takes up the role of lying in business. He considers a classic essay on the matter from the Harvard Business Review, and explores whether there is a meaningful distinction to be drawn between a little truth bending and a lot of fraud.  

As children, the way our parents look at us often gives us the impression that we are the most important person in the world. Yet as we grow older, we often find that we've gone from being the center of the universe to a tiny cog in a corporate machine. In this episode of the In-House Ethicist, John Paul Rollert takes up why we often feel that companies don't care about us. As he explains, it's not personal, rather, they simply can't afford to.

There is a group of young men online who spend a lot of time talking about what they call "productivity hacks." They are obsessed with how to make their days more productive, but their advice seems more consistent making a promising individual more like a robot than a fully formed human being. In this episode of the In-House Ethicist, John Paul Rollert explores this productivity fad and ties it to a longer tale about the connection between Christian beliefs about work and the rise of capitalism in the West. He shows us how we became so devoted to utility – and stayed so devoted – even as religious imperatives receded from public life and we forgot the reason why we cared so much in the first place.  

Being at the head of the class has many benefits, but we all know that academic success isn't a one way ticket to the C-Suite. What the classroom rewards and what professional success requires are not one and the same thing – a lesson that some Valedictorians among us seem to learn the hard way. In this episode of the In-House Ethicist, John Paul Rollert reflects on what Valedictorian-types should think about as they transition to the real world if they hope to achieve the same elite level of success in their professional lives as they did on standardized tests. 

Unless you're a sociopath, it's normal to feel like there are some duties you owe others and to the world around you. We feel compelled to clean up after ourselves when we make a mess or to check in Mom when she isn't feeling well. But when we think about the full scope of the duties that might oblige us – should we do something about climate change or global poverty? – we can quickly find ourselves feeling overwhelmed. In this episode of the In-House Ethicist, John Paul Rollert explores how we should think about our duties to others and how we can manage the trade-offs among our moral priorities. He also investigates how we can strike a balance between being a good person and a sane one, as well.

When people think about capitalism, they don't think of abstract ideas at the heart of an economic system. They think about the things that system produces: the products, the companies, and perhaps most notably, the people. Just as capitalism has changed with technology and culture over time, so have the people most associated with it, from Benjamin Franklin to the suspendered stockbrokers of the 1980s to the tech titans of today.  In this episode of The In-House Ethicist, John Paul Rollert asks the question who will be the next face of capitalism?

Is the customer always right? In a world in which all sales are final, some buyers are bound to get duped. But if the customer's always right, what can retailers do about unreasonable customers? In this episode of The In-House Ethicist, John Paul Rollert looks for a balance between honoring customers and indulging them.

Why is being frugal a virtue? And where exactly do we draw the line between being "frugal" and being "cheap"? In this episode of The In-House Ethicist, John Paul Rollert traces the history of frugality from the 18th century to today, explaining why it continues to be relevant as a moral yardstick.

Michael Lewis's Liar's Poker is a frank and ugly behind-the-scenes account of life as a young associate in the world of Wall St finance. The book is 35 years old, but the basic dilemma at its heart – whether follow your conscience or your bank balance—remains pertinent. In this episode of The In-House Ethicist, John Paul Rollert reflects on what the book tells us about ourselves and our professional choices. How long can you stay in a poisonous environment before you become part of it?

Stakeholder capitalism is the idea that business should be about more than just making money. That seems a world away from the brash financial types of Bret Easton Ellis's 1991 novel 'American Psycho,' or the 1987 movie 'Wall Street.' But in this episode of the The In-House Ethicist, Chicago Booth's John Paul Rollert asks how much we have really moved on, and reflects on the continuing relevance of Easton Ellis's novel.

Some people say that you don't help the poor by giving them money, but by giving them opportunities to earn money. This is behind the periodic campaigns to limit welfare benefits in order to encourage work. But is a handout necessarily different from a hand-up? In this episode of The In-House Ethicist, John Paul Rollert reflects on how we think about helping the poor and charitable giving.

What is within the power of free markets? What can capitalism do for society, what can't it do, and what should it do? On this episode of the The In-House Ethicist, Booth's John Paul Rollert explores how many people came to have an unshakeable faith in capitalism's broad ability to solve nearly any problem, while the experience of others has left them skeptical. In the era after "the end of history," capitalism's defenders need to reckon earnestly with a series of questions about what the system may leave unresolved, he says.

What should the uber wealthy do with their money? How can they leave a lasting legacy? And what responsibilities do they have to society at large? On this episode of the The In-House Ethicist, Booth's John Paul Rollert reflects on the role of those at the very top of the 1 percent.

Individuals acting in their own self-interest are, according to classical economics, an important part of a productive, efficient economy. And yet, selfishness is among the personality traits best known for impeding healthy human relationships. How do we separate the two concepts? On this episode of The In-House Ethicist, John Paul Rollert explores how we define the line between them, and why that line matters.

When a business's customers object to its conduct, they generally have two options: exit (vote with their wallets and cut ties with the company) and voice (boycott, protest, or otherwise raise awareness of their complaint). Social media has changed the calculus behind this choice for both individuals and companies. On this episode of the The In-House Ethicist, John Paul Rollert considers the impact of this change and how the relative appeal of exit and voice have evolved over time.

Streaming services love a good tech startup business story, preferably one featuring a quirky CEO devoid of self-awareness, with an oversized ego and grandiose sense of ambition and purpose, and one finger always resting on the self-destruct button. Hence Super Pumped, the story of Travis Kalanick and Uber, The Dropout, about Elizabeth Holmes and Theranos, and WeCrashed, the tale of Adam Neumann and WeWork. In this episode of The In-House Ethicist,  John Paul Rollert reads his 2023 essay that saw one common thread between the three series: the echoes of the legendary Steve Jobs.

Many of us have seen bullying behavior at work. And though we might not like to admit it, many of us have failed to do anything about it. That can reflect the difficult trade-offs that come with calling out bullying: subjecting ourselves and others to scrutiny, completely changing the dynamic between colleagues, and potentially damaging your own career. In this episode of The In-House Ethicist, John Paul Rollert reflects on "the precarious relationship between ethics and expediency" when it comes to blowing the whistle on workplace bullying.

What does it mean to sell out? What should we make of the tradeoffs we accept between our personal aspirations and professional successes? At what point do such tradeoffs become ethically problematic? On this episode of The In-House Ethicist, John Paul Rollert considers what makes someone a sellout—and whether being one really matters.

One of the byproducts of growing inequality is that many wealthier people grow up, live, and work without ever knowing someone who is poor or struggling financially. On this episode of The In-House Ethicist, John Paul Rollert explores if the wealthy have an obligation to know what life is like for those on the lower end of the income spectrum?

Thanks to the growth of index funds, more and more of us own passive investments. To what extent are we responsible for what goes into those index funds? In this episode of the In-House Ethicist, Chicago Booth's John Paul Rollert asks if there really is such a thing as a truly "passive" investment.