If a group strikes a company or industry, however, the company is forced to reevaluate their policies even if they do not wish to. Take for example, the American writer's strike in Hollywood. Since every writer refused to return to work and write new screenplays, the entire industry was forced to stop putting programming on television. Despite the lack of desire on the part of the networks to change their policies with their writers, they had to adopt change to get their industry working again. A strike is an excellent example of how collective action can interrupt trades since the services individuals are offering can be withheld until the terms are met.
Another angle to the question of the consequences of group action is that sometimes individuals realize that they are participating in collective action, but feel like there is nothing they can do to change or limit the effects of the collective action. When this mentality sets in, everyone is simply going along with the crowd assuming that someone else is in charge. What these individuals do not realize is by taking this philosophy they are what is giving power to the collective action. There is no leader in collective action. It is the group that forms from the mandates of the individuals that gives collective action life. However, individuals assume that the responsibility of the collective action is not their own because surely someone else is causing these things to happen. In regards to change, a person may see every day on the news stories of the suffering of citizens that live and work in another country that supplies products for a dominate nation, and never consider that their actions (of purchasing these goods) are creating this situation. They assume that someone else is to blame and someone else has caused these conditions to exist.
