15 KiB
Systems Thinking & Leverage Points Template
Workflow
Copy this checklist and track your progress:
Systems Thinking Template Progress:
- [ ] Step 1: Define system boundaries and variables
- [ ] Step 2: Create causal loop diagram
- [ ] Step 3: Identify stocks, flows, and delays
- [ ] Step 4: Find leverage points
- [ ] Step 5: Validate and finalize
Step 1: Fill out Section 1: System Definition to clarify boundaries, stocks, flows, and problem pattern.
Step 2: Use Section 2: Causal Loop Diagram to map feedback loops (R for reinforcing, B for balancing).
Step 3: Complete Section 3: Stock-Flow Analysis to identify what accumulates and at what rates.
Step 4: Apply Section 4: Leverage Point Ranking using Meadows' hierarchy to find high-leverage interventions.
Step 5: Verify quality using Quality Checklist before delivering systems-thinking-leverage.md.
1. System Definition
System Boundary
What's inside the system (components you're analyzing and can influence):
[List the key components, actors, processes that are within your scope of analysis and intervention]
What's outside the system (external forces you can't control but affect the system):
[List external factors, constraints, or environmental conditions that influence the system but are beyond your control]
Why this boundary?
[Explain the pragmatic rationale for this scope - what makes this a useful boundary for analysis and intervention?]
Key Variables
Stocks (things that accumulate - nouns):
| Stock Name | Current Level | Description | Measurement Unit |
|---|---|---|---|
| [e.g., Employee count] | [e.g., 250] | [What it represents] | [e.g., # people] |
| [e.g., Technical debt] | [e.g., High] | [Description] | [e.g., story points, hours] |
| [Stock 3] | [Level] | [Description] | [Unit] |
| [Stock 4] | [Level] | [Description] | [Unit] |
Flows (rates of change - verbs):
| Flow Name | Current Rate | Affects Stock | Direction |
|---|---|---|---|
| [e.g., Hiring rate] | [e.g., 5/month] | [Employee count] | [Inflow ↑ / Outflow ↓] |
| [e.g., Attrition rate] | [e.g., 3/month] | [Employee count] | [Outflow ↓] |
| [Flow 3] | [Rate] | [Stock name] | [Direction] |
| [Flow 4] | [Rate] | [Stock name] | [Direction] |
System Goals (implicit or explicit):
- Primary goal: [What is the system fundamentally trying to achieve?]
- Secondary goals: [What other goals compete with or support the primary goal?]
- Whose goals? [Which stakeholders' goals drive system behavior?]
Time Horizon
Analysis timeframe: [Short-term (weeks-months) / Medium-term (quarters-year) / Long-term (years)]
Why this timeframe? [Explain what you're trying to understand or influence within this time period]
Problem Statement
Symptom (observable issue):
[What's the visible problem? Include metrics if available. e.g., "Customer churn rate is 30%/year, up from 15% last year"]
Pattern (recurring dynamic):
[What's the underlying pattern or behavior over time? e.g., "Each time we improve onboarding, churn drops briefly (2-3 months) then returns to previous level"]
Hypothesis (suspected feedback loop):
[What feedback loop might explain this pattern? e.g., "Pressure to reduce churn → Quick onboarding fixes → Users don't understand value prop → Churn returns → More pressure for quick fixes"]
2. Causal Loop Diagram
Feedback Loops Identified
Reinforcing Loop R1: [Name]
[Variable A] → (+/-) → [Variable B] → (+/-) → [Variable C] → (+/-) → [Variable A]
- Description: [How does this loop amplify change? What does it reinforce?]
- Polarity: [+ means same direction, - means opposite direction]
- Effect: [Growth or collapse? What happens if this loop dominates?]
- Time to complete loop: [How long for one full cycle?]
Example: Engaged Employees → (+) → Customer Satisfaction → (+) → Revenue → (+) → Investment → (+) → Engaged Employees (virtuous growth cycle)
Reinforcing Loop R2: [Name] (if applicable) [Same structure as R1]
Balancing Loop B1: [Name]
[Variable A] → (+/-) → [Variable B] → (+/-) → [Goal Gap] → (+/-) → [Corrective Action] → (+/-) → [Variable A]
- Description: [How does this loop resist change? What goal is it trying to maintain?]
- Goal: [Target state this loop seeks]
- Effect: [Stabilizes around what value?]
- Time to complete loop: [How long for feedback?]
Example: Workload → (+) → Stress → (+) → Sick Days → (-) → Workload (temporary relief, not solving root cause)
Balancing Loop B2: [Name] (if applicable) - [Same structure as B1]
System Dynamics Map
ASCII Causal Loop Diagram:
+
A -----> B
^ |
| | +
| v
+ C
| |
| | -
| v
D <----- E
R: A → B → C → A (Reinforcing)
B: C → E → D → A (Balancing with delay [~~])
Key:
→with+means same direction (A increases → B increases)→with-means opposite direction (C increases → E decreases)Rmarks reinforcing loops (amplify change)Bmarks balancing loops (resist change, goal-seeking)[~~]marks delays (time lag between cause and effect)
Your diagram:
[Draw your causal loop diagram here using ASCII art or describe the major connections]
3. Stock-Flow Analysis
Stock Accumulation Dynamics
For each major stock, trace how it changes:
Stock: [Stock Name]
Inflows (what increases it):
- Flow 1: [Name] at rate [X/time period]
- Flow 2: [Name] at rate [Y/time period]
Outflows (what decreases it):
- Flow 1: [Name] at rate [X/time period]
- Flow 2: [Name] at rate [Y/time period]
Current state: [Accumulating / Depleting / Stable]
Why? [Are inflows > outflows (accumulating), inflows < outflows (depleting), or balanced (stable)?]
Delays:
- From [Flow/Action] to [Stock change]: [Time lag, e.g., "3-6 months"]
- From [Flow/Action] to [Stock change]: [Time lag]
Implications: [What happens if this stock continues accumulating/depleting? What's the consequence?]
Example: Technical Debt stock - Inflows: quick fixes (20/sprint) + shaky features (10/sprint) = 30/sprint. Outflows: refactoring (5/sprint) + root-cause fixes (3/sprint) = 8/sprint. Net: +22/sprint accumulating. Delays: 3-6 months to slowdown, 1-2 sprints for improvement. Implication: In 6 months, debt slows development 50%, reinforcing quick-fix pressure.
4. Leverage Point Ranking
Candidate Interventions
List all possible places to intervene:
| Intervention | Description | Leverage Level (1-12) | Feasibility (High/Med/Low) | Expected Impact (High/Med/Low) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| [Intervention 1] | [Brief description] | [1-12, see hierarchy below] | [H/M/L] | [H/M/L] |
| [Intervention 2] | [Description] | [Level] | [Feasibility] | [Impact] |
| [Intervention 3] | [Description] | [Level] | [Feasibility] | [Impact] |
| [Intervention 4] | [Description] | [Level] | [Feasibility] | [Impact] |
| [Intervention 5] | [Description] | [Level] | [Feasibility] | [Impact] |
Meadows' Leverage Point Hierarchy (for classification):
- 12: Parameters (numbers, rates) - LOW leverage
- 11: Buffers (stock sizes vs. flows)
- 10: Stock-flow structures (physical design)
- 9: Delays (time lags)
- 8: Balancing feedback loop strength
- 7: Reinforcing feedback loop strength
- 6: Information flows (who knows what)
- 5: Rules (incentives, constraints)
- 4: Self-organization (adapt/evolve capability)
- 3: Goals (system purpose)
- 2: Paradigms (mindset, mental models)
- 1: Transcending paradigms (paradigm fluidity) - HIGH leverage
High-Leverage Interventions (Priority)
Primary Intervention: [Name]
- Leverage level: [1-7, high leverage]
- Mechanism: [How does this intervention work? Which loop does it affect?]
- Why high leverage? [Explain why this is more effective than adjusting parameters]
- Feasibility challenges: [What makes this hard? Who will resist?]
- Time to impact: [How long until results visible, accounting for delays?]
- Success metrics: [How will you know it's working? Leading and lagging indicators]
Supporting Intervention 1: [Name]
- Leverage level: [Level]
- How it supports primary: [Explain complementary effect]
- Rationale: [Why combine these interventions?]
Supporting Intervention 2: [Name]
[Same structure as Supporting Intervention 1]
Low-Leverage Interventions (Avoid or Deprioritize)
Why avoid:
| Intervention | Leverage Level | Why It's Low Leverage | Better Alternative |
|---|---|---|---|
| [e.g., Increase budget 10%] | [12 - Parameter] | [Temporary, competitors can match] | [Change hiring goal from "fill seats" to "build capability"] |
| [Intervention 2] | [Level] | [Reason] | [Alternative] |
5. Intervention Strategy
Recommended Approach
Primary intervention: [Name from high-leverage section above]
Supporting interventions: [List 1-3 complementary interventions]
Sequencing: [What order? Simultaneous or phased?]
- [First action and timing]
- [Second action and timing]
- [Third action and timing]
Rationale: [Why this sequence? What dependencies exist?]
Predicted Outcomes
Short-term (1-3 months): [Immediate effects? Which loops activate? Worse before better?]
Medium-term (3-12 months): [Reinforcing loop momentum? Delays complete? Resistances emerge?]
Long-term (1+ years): [New equilibrium? New limits? System evolution?]
Risks & Unintended Consequences
Risk 1: [What could go wrong?]
- Likelihood: [High / Medium / Low]
- Impact if occurs: [Severity]
- Mitigation: [How to prevent or reduce risk]
Risk 2: [Unintended consequence from intervention]
- Mechanism: [Which loop or delay causes this?]
- Mitigation: [How to monitor and adjust]
Risk 3: [System resistance or pushback]
- Source: [Who or what will resist?]
- Mitigation: [How to address resistance]
Success Metrics
Leading indicators (early signals intervention is working):
- [Metric to track weekly/monthly]
- [Metric to track]
- [Metric to track]
Lagging indicators (longer-term outcomes):
- [Metric to track quarterly/annually]
- [Metric to track]
- [Metric to track]
How to interpret: [What trends indicate success vs. failure? What adjustments might be needed?]
Monitoring & Adaptation Plan
Check-in frequency: [Weekly / Bi-weekly / Monthly]
What to monitor:
- [Key stock levels]
- [Flow rates]
- [Loop activation signs (is reinforcing loop building momentum?)]
- [Delay timers (have we waited long enough for effect to show?)]
- [Resistance signals (pushback, workarounds)]
Adaptation triggers: [Under what conditions do we adjust strategy?]
Responsible party: [Who monitors and makes adjustment calls?]
Quality Checklist
Before finalizing, verify:
System Definition
- System boundary clearly stated (what's in/out)?
- Boundary rationale pragmatic (useful scope for intervention)?
- Stocks identified (things that accumulate - nouns)?
- Flows identified (rates of change - verbs)?
- Stocks and flows connected (flows change which stocks)?
- System goals stated (implicit or explicit)?
- Time horizon appropriate for problem and intervention?
Causal Loop Diagram
- At least one reinforcing loop (R) identified?
- At least one balancing loop (B) identified?
- Polarity marked (+ same direction, - opposite direction)?
- Loop effects described (growth/collapse for R, goal-seeking for B)?
- Delays explicitly noted where they exist?
- Diagram shows interconnections (not just isolated pairs)?
Stock-Flow Analysis
- For each major stock: inflows and outflows listed?
- Current state assessed (accumulating/depleting/stable)?
- Delays from flows to stock changes estimated?
- Implications of accumulation/depletion stated?
- Time lags quantified (not just "delayed" but "3 months")?
Leverage Point Analysis
- Multiple intervention points considered (not just first idea)?
- Each intervention classified by leverage level (1-12)?
- High-leverage interventions (1-7) prioritized over low-leverage (8-12)?
- Feasibility vs. leverage trade-offs acknowledged?
- Parameter-tweaking (level 12) avoided as primary strategy?
Intervention Strategy
- Primary intervention is high-leverage (levels 1-7)?
- Supporting interventions complement primary (not duplicate)?
- Predicted outcomes based on loop dynamics (not just wishful thinking)?
- Short, medium, long-term effects distinguished?
- Delays accounted for in outcome timeline?
- Unintended consequences anticipated (second-order effects)?
- System resistance identified (who/what will push back)?
- Success metrics include leading and lagging indicators?
- Monitoring plan specified (frequency, what to track, adaptation triggers)?
System Archetype Recognition (if applicable)
- Does system match a known archetype (fixes that fail, shifting burden, tragedy of commons, limits to growth)?
- If yes, typical failure mode acknowledged?
- Archetype-specific high-leverage intervention identified?
Overall Quality
- Problem statement clear (symptom → pattern → hypothesis)?
- Analysis grounded in feedback loop logic (not just list of causes)?
- Interventions address structure, not just symptoms?
- Assumptions stated explicitly (what must be true for this to work)?
- Confidence appropriate (not overconfident given complexity)?
- Actionable recommendations (clear what to do, when, how to measure)?
Minimum Standard: If any checklist item is unchecked and relevant to your system, address it before finalizing. Use rubric (evaluators/rubric_systems_thinking_leverage.json) for detailed scoring. Average score ≥ 3.5/5.
Common Mistakes to Avoid
❌ Treating symptoms not root causes - "Add more people" (parameter) vs. "Eliminate low-value work" (goal/rules). Fix: Ask "what feedback loop creates this symptom?"
❌ Ignoring delays - "Tried for 2 weeks, didn't work" (but skill development takes 3-6 months). Fix: Estimate delays, wait appropriately.
❌ Single-loop thinking - Only seeing growth (R loop), missing limit (B loop). Fix: Look for both R and B loops. Every R hits a limit.
❌ Confusing stocks and flows - "Morale is flowing" (morale = stock, recognition = flow). Fix: Stocks are nouns (accumulations), flows are verbs (rates).
❌ Low-leverage interventions - Tweaking parameters when structure/goals/paradigms need changing. Fix: Use hierarchy (1-12), prioritize 1-7 over 8-12.
❌ Unintended consequences - "Speed up releases" → Technical debt → Slower releases. Fix: Trace second-order effects through all loops.