Maybe it's just me but that always grated with me a bit. It felt sometimes a bit like a Today programme interview where "presenter style" was the product.
Not to take anything away from the content though. It's the sort of programme the licence fee was made for.
It has to do with him driving the conversation to a specific point in the narrative; academics tend to meander and go off on tangents, but he invited three of them and the next topic is the point of expertise of the following person. You can sometimes hear him reward the guests "yes, that's what I was getting it" or "that's a great way to put it".
In other words; he did some prep! Unlike many podcasters.
It's not just you, that does grate on me sometimes as well. I get that he needs to move the show on, but I often feel like the guest is trying to make quite an important point when he interrupts. Still love it, though.