Leverage Points in Systems
You're pushing a boulder up a hill. Exhausting effort, minimal progress.
Someone suggests: "Why not use a lever?"
With a lever and fulcrum, the same force moves the boulder easily. The lever is a leverage point—a place where small effort produces large effect.
Systems have leverage points too.
Most interventions in systems target obvious, visible, but low-leverage places. We push boulders by hand because we don't see the levers.
In 1999, systems thinker Donella Meadows published "Leverage Points: Places to Intervene in a System"—identifying twelve leverage points ranked from least to most effective for transforming system behavior.
Her core insight: People typically intervene at the weakest leverage points because they're most obvious and politically easiest. But transforming systems requires finding and pushing higher-leverage points.
Understanding leverage points reveals where to focus effort for maximum impact and why common interventions often fail despite enormous effort.
What Are Leverage Points?
Leverage point: A place in a system where small shifts in one thing can produce large changes in everything.
Key characteristics:
Disproportionate impact:
- Small change → large system effect
- High return on effort
Often non-obvious:
- Not where attention naturally goes
- Require systems understanding to identify
Vary in power:
- Some leverage points stronger than others
- Hierarchy from weak to powerful
Analogy: Steering a ship
Low leverage: Push the ship (enormous effort, minimal effect)
Medium leverage: Use rudder (small movement, changes direction over time)
High leverage: Change destination (redefines entire journey)
Meadows' Hierarchy of Leverage Points
From Weakest to Strongest
Meadows ranked 12 intervention points by transformative potential:
Low Leverage (12-9): Parameters and Material Stocks
Weakest leverage points. Easy to change, but produce minimal transformation.
12. Constants, Parameters, Numbers
Examples:
- Tax rates
- Subsidies
- Standards
- Budget allocations
Why weak:
- System structure unchanged
- Often just shift behavior within existing structure
- Effects usually incremental
Example: Minimum wage
- Changing number ($ per hour) affects individual incomes
- But doesn't change system structure (employer-employee relationships, market dynamics)
- Important for individuals, minimal system transformation
11. Sizes of Buffers and Stabilizing Stocks
Examples:
- Water reservoirs
- Inventory stocks
- Savings accounts
- Forest carbon storage
Why weak:
- Buffers smooth fluctuations but don't change system dynamics
- Useful for stability, but don't transform behavior
Example: Strategic petroleum reserve
- Buffer against oil supply shocks
- Doesn't change energy system structure
- Provides stability, not transformation
10. Structure of Material Stocks and Flows
Examples:
- Road networks
- Building infrastructure
- Industrial capacity
- Population age structure
Why weak leverage:
- Physical infrastructure changes slowly
- Constrains but doesn't determine behavior
- Can be circumvented (people find workarounds)
Example: Highway system
- Changes where people can drive
- But doesn't change whether they drive (that's determined by higher-leverage factors)
9. Length of Delays
Examples:
- Time between action and consequence
- Information lags
- Processing times
Why moderate leverage:
- Delays shape system behavior significantly
- But often physical/biological limits (can't shorten much)
- When reducible, can improve stability
Example: Reducing medical test result delays
- Faster feedback enables better treatment decisions
- But doesn't change healthcare system structure fundamentally
Medium Leverage (8-6): Feedback Mechanisms
Start affecting how system regulates itself
8. Strength of Negative Feedback Loops
Negative feedback: Balancing loops that stabilize system
Examples:
- Thermostats
- Inventory management
- Regulatory mechanisms
Why moderate-high leverage:
- Determines how strongly system resists change
- Can create stability or rigidity
Example: Price mechanisms in markets
- High prices → reduce demand → prices fall (stabilizing)
- Strengthening feedback (removing price controls) increases market responsiveness
- Weakening feedback (price controls) reduces responsiveness
7. Strength of Positive Feedback Loops
Positive feedback: Reinforcing loops that amplify change
Examples:
- Compound interest
- Network effects
- Vicious/virtuous cycles
Why high leverage:
- Determines rate of growth/collapse
- Small changes can dramatically alter trajectories
Example: Education → income → children's education
- Reinforcing loop can create virtuous cycle (upward mobility)
- Or vicious cycle (poverty trap)
- Breaking reinforcing poverty loops has high leverage
6. Structure of Information Flows
Who knows what, when
Examples:
- Transparency requirements
- Feedback mechanisms
- Data availability
Why high leverage:
- Information shapes decisions
- Missing information prevents appropriate responses
- New information can transform behavior without forcing
Example: Nutrition labels
- Didn't ban unhealthy food
- Just provided information
- Changed consumer behavior and manufacturer formulations
- High leverage because informed decisions beat mandates
High Leverage (5-3): System Rules and Goals
Change how system is structured to behave
5. Rules of the System
Rules: Incentives, punishments, constraints, permissions
Examples:
- Property rights
- Constitutions
- Laws
- Cultural norms
Why high leverage:
- Rules determine what behaviors are possible, rewarded, punished
- Changing rules changes what people optimize for
Example: Property rights for fisheries
- Open access → overfishing (tragedy of commons)
- Individual transferable quotas → sustainable fishing (incentive to preserve future)
- Rule change transforms behavior without changing individual motivations
4. Power to Add, Change, Evolve System Structure
Self-organization: System's ability to change its own structure
Examples:
- Genetic evolution
- Learning organizations
- Adaptive institutions
- Innovation capacity
Why very high leverage:
- Enables system to evolve, not just operate within fixed structure
- Creates new possibilities
- Generates resilience and adaptation
Example: Open innovation
- Organizations that can restructure based on learning
- Versus rigid bureaucracies that can't adapt
- Ability to evolve structure beats optimizing fixed structure
3. Goals of the System
What the system is trying to achieve
Examples:
- Profit maximization vs. stakeholder value
- Economic growth vs. sustainability
- Test scores vs. learning
- Symptom treatment vs. health
Why very high leverage:
- Everything else serves the goal
- Wrong goal optimizes system for wrong outcome
- Changing goal transforms entire system
Example: Corporate goals
- Shareholder value maximization → short-term thinking, externalities
- Stakeholder value (employees, community, environment, customers, shareholders) → different optimization
- Same company, different goal = completely different behavior
Highest Leverage (2-1): Paradigms and Transcendence
The deepest levels: worldviews and ability to change them
2. Mindset or Paradigm Out of Which the System Arises
Paradigm: Underlying assumptions, beliefs, worldview that generates the system
Examples:
- Nature as resource vs. nature as partner
- Competition vs. cooperation as primary
- Humans separate from nature vs. part of nature
- Mechanistic vs. living systems worldview
Why highest leverage:
- Paradigm generates goals, rules, structure
- Change paradigm → everything downstream changes
- Most difficult to change (but most transformative)
Example: Copernican Revolution
- Paradigm shift: Earth center of universe → Sun center
- Changed astronomy, physics, philosophy, religion
- Didn't just add information, transformed framework for understanding
Example: Sustainability paradigm shift
- Old: Nature infinite, humans separate, growth always good
- New: Nature finite, humans embedded, sustainable equilibrium needed
- Everything else (goals, rules, measures) flows from paradigm
1. Transcending Paradigms
Ability to step outside all paradigms
Recognizing:
- All paradigms are partial
- No paradigm is "true" (all are models)
- Multiple valid perspectives exist
- Flexibility to use different paradigms for different purposes
Why ultimate leverage:
- Not locked into any worldview
- Can see limitations of current paradigm
- Can adopt new paradigms when useful
- Enables continuous evolution
Quote (Meadows): "It is to 'get' at a gut level the paradigm that there are paradigms, and to see that that itself is a paradigm, and to regard that whole realization as devastatingly funny."
Why People Focus on Low-Leverage Points
The Paradox of Leverage
Counter-intuitive pattern: The higher the leverage, the less obvious and more difficult politically.
Low-leverage points (12-9):
- Visible, measurable, concrete
- Politically safe (don't threaten power structure)
- Easy to understand and communicate
- Results seem direct (change parameter, see effect)
- But: Minimal transformative impact
High-leverage points (5-1):
- Abstract, difficult to measure
- Politically threatening (change power, rules, worldviews)
- Hard to understand and communicate
- Results indirect and delayed
- But: Transformative system-level impact
Example: Education reform
Low leverage (common focus):
- Test scores (parameter)
- Class sizes (parameter)
- Teacher salaries (parameter)
- Budget per student (parameter)
High leverage (rarely addressed):
- Information flows (do students get feedback on actual learning?)
- Rules (how are teachers/students/schools incentivized?)
- Goals (are we optimizing for test scores or actual learning?)
- Paradigm (what is education for? Credentialing vs. learning vs. socialization?)
Political reality: Easier to argue about budget numbers than question fundamental purpose
Examples Across Domains
Healthcare System
Low leverage (where most effort goes):
- Healthcare spending per capita (parameter)
- Number of hospital beds (buffer)
- Insurance premiums (parameter)
Higher leverage:
- Information flows (patient access to own health data, outcomes transparency)
- Rules (incentives for prevention vs. treatment, payment structures)
- Goals (treating disease vs. producing health)
- Paradigm (medical model vs. holistic health model)
Why healthcare costs rise despite huge spending: Pushing low-leverage parameters without changing rules, goals, or paradigm
Climate Change
Low leverage:
- Carbon price level (parameter)
- Renewable energy subsidies (parameter)
- Fuel efficiency standards (parameter)
Higher leverage:
- Information flows (real-time emissions visibility, climate attribution)
- Rules (property rights for atmosphere, liability for emissions, fossil fuel subsidies removal)
- Goals (GDP growth vs. sustainable prosperity)
- Paradigm (nature as resource to exploit vs. living system to steward)
Why progress slow: Political focus on tweaking parameters rather than changing rules or paradigm
Organizations
Low leverage:
- Budget allocations (parameter)
- Headcount (parameter)
- Salaries (parameter)
Higher leverage:
- Information flows (performance feedback, market signals)
- Rules (decision-making authority, incentive structures)
- Goals (short-term profit vs. long-term value creation)
- Paradigm (mechanistic "organization as machine" vs. "organization as living system")
Finding Leverage Points
How to Identify
1. Map the system:
- What are components?
- How do they interact?
- What feedback loops exist?
- What are delays?
2. Trace causation:
- What determines current behavior?
- What would need to change to alter behavior significantly?
- What constraints are binding vs. slack?
3. Look upstream:
- Parameters determined by rules
- Rules determined by goals
- Goals determined by paradigm
- Paradigm usually unconscious
4. Ask "why":
- Why does this parameter have this value?
- Why do these rules exist?
- Why is this the goal?
- What assumptions underlie this structure?
5. Look for information gaps:
- What information is missing?
- Who doesn't know what they need to know?
- What feedback loops are broken?
Using Leverage Points Effectively
Principles
1. Higher isn't always better in all contexts
- Sometimes parameters need adjusting (low leverage but necessary)
- Match intervention to situation
- Paradigm shifts take generations; parameter changes immediate
2. Resistance increases with leverage
- High-leverage interventions threaten existing power
- Expect pushback
- Need political strategy, not just technical understanding
3. Work at multiple levels simultaneously
- Change paradigm (long-term transformation)
- Change rules (medium-term behavior)
- Adjust parameters (short-term relief)
- All three together beats any one alone
4. Start where you can
- If high-leverage points blocked politically, start lower
- Build understanding and coalition
- Move to higher leverage as possible
Common Mistakes
1. Optimizing for Wrong Goal
Pushing hard on achieving goal that itself is misaligned
Example: Optimize education for test scores (goal), but test scores don't equal learning (actual desired outcome)
Higher leverage: Change goal from "high test scores" to "deep learning"
2. Strengthening Wrong Feedback
Making system more efficient at doing the wrong thing
Example: Make fossil fuel extraction more efficient (stronger positive feedback for emissions)
Higher leverage: Weaken fossil fuel reinforcing loop, strengthen renewable reinforcing loop
3. Ignoring Information Flows
Implementing rules without ensuring information for compliance
Example: Carbon taxes without emissions measurement infrastructure
Higher leverage: Create information infrastructure enabling feedback
4. Treating Symptoms Not Structure
Adjusting parameters to counteract structural problems
Example: Subsidizing failing industries (parameter) rather than enabling economic transition (structure)
Higher leverage: Change rules/goals that created industry dependence
Practical Implications
For Individuals
Recognize: Most visible interventions are lowest leverage
Look upstream: What rules, goals, paradigms create current situation?
Question assumptions: What if underlying paradigm is wrong?
Focus energy: Better to push moderately on high-leverage point than hard on low-leverage
For Organizations
Don't just tweak parameters: Budget changes are low leverage
Examine information flows: Do decision-makers have needed information?
Question goals: Are we optimizing for what actually matters?
Challenge paradigms: What assumptions about how organization "should" work might be limiting?
For Policymakers
Resist parameter fetish: Arguing about exact tax rate is low leverage
Change rules: Incentive structures have high leverage
Redefine goals: What is policy actually trying to achieve?
Enable paradigm shifts: Education, discourse, examples of alternatives
Conclusion: Push Where It Matters
Most effort goes to lowest-leverage interventions because they're:
- Most visible
- Easiest to understand
- Politically safest
- Seem most direct
But transformation requires higher-leverage interventions:
- Information flows
- System rules
- Goals
- Paradigms
Key insights:
- Leverage points exist in every system (places where small changes create large effects)
- Hierarchy of power (Meadows' ranking from parameters to paradigms)
- Paradox: Highest leverage = least obvious (and most politically difficult)
- People optimize low-leverage points (visible, measurable, safe)
- Transformation requires high leverage (rules, goals, paradigms)
- Multiple levels simultaneously (parameters + rules + goals + paradigm)
- Find leverage by mapping structure (trace causation upstream)
The boulder won't move with bare hands.
Find the lever.
In systems, the lever is:
- Not the parameter
- Not the buffer
- Not even the structure
The lever is:
- The information flows
- The rules
- The goals
- The paradigm
Small shifts there.
Large system transformations.
That's leverage.
References
Meadows, D. H. (1999). "Leverage Points: Places to Intervene in a System." Sustainability Institute.
Meadows, D. H. (2008). Thinking in Systems: A Primer. Chelsea Green Publishing.
Sterman, J. D. (2000). Business Dynamics: Systems Thinking and Modeling for a Complex World. McGraw-Hill.
Senge, P. M. (1990). The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. Doubleday.
Forrester, J. W. (1971). "Counterintuitive Behavior of Social Systems." Technology Review, 73(3), 52–68.
Ackoff, R. L. (1999). Ackoff's Best: His Classic Writings on Management. John Wiley & Sons.
Stroh, D. P. (2015). Systems Thinking for Social Change. Chelsea Green Publishing.
Kim, D. H., & Anderson, V. (1998). Systems Archetype Basics: From Story to Structure. Pegasus Communications.
Scharmer, C. O. (2009). Theory U: Leading from the Future as It Emerges. Berrett-Koehler.
Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. Cambridge University Press.
Kuhn, T. S. (1962). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. University of Chicago Press.
Raworth, K. (2017). Doughnut Economics: Seven Ways to Think Like a 21st-Century Economist. Chelsea Green Publishing.
Capra, F., & Luisi, P. L. (2014). The Systems View of Life: A Unifying Vision. Cambridge University Press.
Checkland, P. (1999). Systems Thinking, Systems Practice. John Wiley & Sons.
Abson, D. J., et al. (2017). "Leverage Points for Sustainability Transformation." Ambio, 46(1), 30–39.
About This Series: This article is part of a larger exploration of systems thinking and complexity. For related concepts, see [What Is a System], [Feedback Loops Explained], [Why Fixes Often Backfire], and [System Paradigms and Worldviews].