From skills-for-humanity
Applies Donella Meadows' leverage point hierarchy to identify high-impact interventions in systems. Useful when asked about leverage points or system change.
How this skill is triggered — by the user, by Claude, or both
Slash command
/skills-for-humanity:s4h-systems-leverage-analysisThe summary Claude sees in its skill listing — used to decide when to auto-load this skill
Most interventions target low-leverage parameters — adjusting numbers, tweaking rates — when high-leverage structural points are available and being ignored. Donella Meadows identified 12 places to intervene in a system, ranging from parameters (nearly powerless) to paradigm (most powerful). The reason high-leverage points go unused is that they face the highest resistance; understanding this i...
Most interventions target low-leverage parameters — adjusting numbers, tweaking rates — when high-leverage structural points are available and being ignored. Donella Meadows identified 12 places to intervene in a system, ranging from parameters (nearly powerless) to paradigm (most powerful). The reason high-leverage points go unused is that they face the highest resistance; understanding this is part of the analysis.
Step 1: List Candidate Interventions Gather all interventions currently being considered or tried. Include past attempts that failed.
Framing check: Confirm the specific system and the interventions in focus before continuing. State what you've identified — the system being analysed and the intervention set you're working with — in one sentence, then use AskUserQuestion:
Step 2: Classify by Meadows Hierarchy Map each intervention to its leverage level:
Step 3: Identify the Default Level What level is typically targeted — and why? Understand the political, cognitive, or practical reasons low-leverage points get chosen.
Step 4: Surface Ignored High-Leverage Points
Before narrowing: Show the complete classified set of interventions from Step 2 to the user first. Use AskUserQuestion:
What higher-leverage interventions exist that are not being tried? Trace why they are being avoided (too costly, politically threatening, requires belief change, long time horizon).
Step 5: Assess Feasibility High-leverage points often face disproportionate resistance. For each high-leverage option: what would be required to act on it? Is it feasible given current constraints?
Before proceeding, use the AskUserQuestion tool. State your interpretation of the situation in 1–2 sentences — what is being analyzed and what the core question is — then ask:
Proceed based on their selection. If the user reframes, incorporate the correction before running any analysis.
Intervention Table
| Intervention | Leverage Level | Leverage Type | Feasibility | Resistance Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Default Level Being Targeted: [level + reason]
Highest-Leverage Feasible Point: [intervention + why it's higher leverage + what unlocks it]
Ignored High-Leverage Options: [what they are + why they're being avoided]
High-leverage points are often counterintuitive — pushing harder in the obvious direction can make things worse. Identify any points where the intuitive intervention is actually negative leverage.
After delivering this output, use AskUserQuestion to offer the next move:
/s4h-strategy-positioning — Use leverage points for strategic positioning/s4h-resource-allocation-analysis — Allocate resources to the highest-leverage points/s4h-decision-premortem-analysis — Stress-test the assumptions behind leverage estimatesnpx claudepluginhub human-avatar/skills-for-humanityRanks candidate interventions by Donella Meadows' 12-level hierarchy to find the highest-leverage point you can actually move. Use when parameter tweaks keep not sticking.
Designs wise systems interventions by mapping proposed actions against Meadows' leverage points, checking for unintended consequences, and generating alternatives.
Maps feedback loops, identifies system archetypes, and ranks interventions by Meadows' leverage hierarchy for complex problems with interconnected components.