# Leverage Points

Donella Meadows, 1997/1999. 12 places to intervene in a system, in increasing order of effectiveness. Most policy interventions happen at the bottom of the list (parameters); the actually transformative ones happen at the top (paradigms) — and are the most resisted.

## When to use

- Civic / org / institutional change
- Diagnosing why interventions fail (almost always at lower level than problem)
- Strategic critique of policy proposals
- "Where in this system should I push?"

## Don't use when

- Single-creator creative work (framework needs multi-actor systems with feedback loops)
- Short-term tactical decisions
- Team of <5 (use simpler tools)

## The 12 levels (least → most powerful)

**12. Constants, parameters, numbers** — subsidies, taxes, standards, prices. Most policy fights happen here. Rarely change behavior.

**11. Sizes of buffers** — stabilizing stocks relative to flows. Big buffer = stable but inflexible.

**10. Structure of stocks and flows** — transport networks, supply chains, age structures. Hard to change once built; high leverage in original design.

**9. Lengths of delays** — relative to rate of system change. Delays usually can't be shortened; the leverage is in *slowing the system to match the delays*.

**8. Strength of negative feedback loops** — relative to disturbance corrected against. Strengthen with: preventive medicine, pollution taxes, FOIA, whistleblower protection.

**7. Gain around positive feedback loops** — *Reducing* gain on a positive loop is more leveraged than strengthening the negative loop counter-acting it. Progressive tax weakens "success-to-the-successful" loops directly.

**6. Information flows** — who has access to what. Adding a feedback loop where one didn't exist. (Toxic Release Inventory: pure disclosure dropped emissions 40%.)

**5. Rules** — incentives, punishments, constraints. Constitutions, laws, terms of service. *"If you want to understand the deepest malfunctions of systems, pay attention to the rules, and to who has power over them."*

**4. Power to add, change, evolve, or self-organize** — biological evolution, technical advance, social revolution. Suppressing variety to maintain control is a system crime.

**3. Goals of the system** — what is it *for*? Shareholder return vs employee welfare = different systems with same physical structure. *"Everything further down the list will be twisted to conform to that goal."*

**2. Mindset / paradigm** — unstated assumptions that generate the goals. "Growth is good", "markets are efficient". Hard to change in cultures (generations); change in individuals all at once (a click).

**1. Power to transcend paradigms** — hold any paradigm lightly. The capacity to *switch*. Personal practice, not policy.

## Procedure

1. **Map the system.** Stocks, flows, feedback loops, rules, goals, paradigm.
2. **Locate the problem at a level.** A symptom at level 12 (rising costs) often originates at level 5 (rules permit cost externalization), level 3 (short-term return goal), or level 2 (paradigm assumes infinite resource).
3. **List candidate interventions at 3+ levels.** Be honest about which you can act on.
4. **Order by leverage and feasibility.** The most leveraged intervention is rarely the most feasible.
5. **Note direction risk.** A high-leverage intervention pushed wrong is worse than a low-leverage one pushed right. *"Time after time I've ... discovered that there's already a lot of attention to that point. Everyone is trying very hard to push it IN THE WRONG DIRECTION."*

## Worked example

**System**: 50-person tech company with chronic burnout despite generous benefits.
- Level 12 (PTO): fine, no help.
- Level 8 (negative feedback): weak — burnout invisible until people quit.
- Level 6 (info flows): obscured — managers don't see workload signals.
- Level 5 (rules): implicitly reward overwork.
- Level 3 (goal): "ship features fast."
- Level 2 (paradigm): "engineering output is linearly proportional to hours worked."

Recommendation: combine level-8 (mandatory monthly burnout-explicit 1:1s — feasible) + level-3 (explicit goal change to "build sustainable engineering org" — slow but high-leverage). Skip level 12.

## Anti-slop notes

- Don't list all 12 levels every time. Identify the relevant 2–3 for this problem.
- Don't claim every problem has a paradigm-level solution. Most have rule-level or parameter-level.
- Don't recommend "change the paradigm" as if it were actionable. It usually isn't, on its own.

Source: Meadows, *Places to Intervene in a System* (1997/1999); *Thinking in Systems* (Chelsea Green, 2008). donellameadows.org.
