Thus, in a very small group, where each member gets a substantial proportion of the total gain simply because there are few others in the group, a collective good can often be provided by the voluntary, self-interested action of the members of the group. In smaller groups marked by considerable degrees of inequality that is, in groups of members of unequal "size" or extent of interest in the collective good-there is the greatest likelihood that a collective good will be provided; for the greater the interest in the collective good of any single member, the greater the likelihood that that member will get such a significant proportion of the total benefit from the collective good that he will gain from seeing that the good is provided, even if he has to pay all of the cost himself.
In Olson's Theory of Collective Actions, he argues that people's efforts to pursue political goals there is a way to separate the majority interest from the minority interest. In this particular passage, makes great emphasis on the idea that the minority interest can be counted for delivery of a common good without being compelled. It is so to the point where and a single member can put fourth the cost for the collective good. This is quite interest because it can easily touch on the "free rider problem", which as Olson described pertains to someone who benefits from something but contributes nothing to maintain the pursuit of the goal. If only one member can care for the cost, where does it really leave the rest of the members? His 4 solutions however seems to be a great balance and solution to this problem.