Collective action problems arise when individuals lack motivation to participate. In his influential book, The Logic of Collective Action, economist Mancur Olson examined when these problems occur, particularly noting their frequency among organized groups. People often refrain from taking action if they believe the benefits won’t outweigh the associated costs. For instance, many citizens have opinions on taxation, gun control, or environmental issues, but these feelings usually aren’t strong enough to drive them to get involved politically. Most individuals remain inactive on various topics either due to a lack of strong convictions or the belief that their participation won’t significantly influence policy decisions. As a result, contacting a politician may seem pointless, as a single call is unlikely to change their stance.

Similar dynamics can be seen in group projects where some students choose not to contribute. They may opt for other activities, realizing they can achieve the same grade as their peers without putting in the effort. This situation is often described as the free rider problem, where individuals benefit from a collective effort without participating in it. When National Public Radio (NPR) raises funds, many listeners do not donate. Since one listener's contribution is unlikely to change the funding outcome, they may choose to benefit from the service without contributing.

If free riding is so common, why are there numerous interest groups and high membership in the United States? One reason is that free riding can be addressed in different ways. Olson noted that some groups are more effective at overcoming collective action challenges. These groups can sustain themselves by securing funding from outside supporters. Those with financial resources have an edge in organizing because they can provide incentives or hire lobbyists. Additionally, smaller, well-organized groups tend to have advantages. Their members often share similar viewpoints, which facilitates reaching agreement. In smaller groups, it is also harder for individuals to free ride. In contrast, larger groups involve more people and diverse opinions, complicating consensus. It's also easier for someone to free ride unnoticed in a large group. However, if individuals do not advocate for their own interests, they risk being overlooked, especially if smaller, more active groups with opposing interests lobby effectively. Even in a democracy like the United States, policies often favor a select few rather than the broader population.

Leaders within groups significantly contribute to overcoming collective action issues. Political scientist Robert Salisbury pointed out that group leaders may provide incentives to encourage participation. Some offer material incentives, tangible benefits that come from joining, like the discounts that AARP provides on hotel stays and insurance. The low membership fees can help members save money. Leaders may also offer solidary incentives, appealing to those who want to connect with others sharing similar concerns. Research suggests that people naturally gravitate toward those with shared interests. For example, the NAACP focuses on civil rights and equality, attracting members who have experienced discrimination.

Purpose-driven incentives emphasize the causes supported by the group. For instance, someone committed to defending individual rights might join the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) because it champions the freedoms outlined in the Constitution, including the free expression of unpopular opinions. ACLU members may disagree with some of the viewpoints they defend, but they believe that safeguarding civil liberties is vital to democracy. This perspective aligns with James Madison’s earlier defense of factions. A dedication to protecting rights can motivate individuals to join and participate, allowing interest groups and their leaders to use various incentives to tackle collective action challenges and engage their members.