of the group problem-solving process in a value-neutral manner. The groupthink model is restrictive and deterministic in the sense that numerous elements are phrased to suggest that certain aspects of the process are pathological, such as ”too few alternatives”. The GGPS model suggests no such assumptions in its terms, and recasts this term as ”number of alternatives”. Fuller and Aldag argue that a comprehensive model has to reflect the political environment of the real world and real workplaces. Thus, the GGPS model considers a larger set of antecedents than the groupthink model, among these are group type, leader power, organizational political norms etc. Elements of the GGPS model Antecedents Three sets of antecedents are proposed by GGPS: decision characteristics, group structure and decision-making context. Decision characteristics Elements belonging here are the importance of the decision, time pressure, structure, procedural requirements, and task characteristics. Examples: whether the task is simple or complex will make a substantial difference in required member input, as well as in whether a directive leader is necessary. Group interaction is also altered if, given a task, a single correct answer exists and if it becomes obvious to any of the members, since subsequent group interaction will likely be reduced. Group structure Elements are cohesiveness, members’ homogeneity, insulation of the group, leader impartiality, leader power, history of the group, probability of future interaction, stage of group development and type of group. Examples: whether group members anticipate to work together again in the future can have a major impact on to what degree can political motives influence the process. If it's unlikely that the group will come together again, political influence can be lessened. Stage of group development is important because members of mature group with a long history may feel more comfortable challenging each other's ideas, thus cohesiveness results in quality decision making and positive outcomes. Decision making context Elements are organizational political norms, member political motives, prior discussion of issue, prior goal attainment, goal definition, and degree of stress from external threat. Examples: whether group members identified and pursue a unitary goal or they have multiple, discrepant goals influences the rationality of the decision-making process. Members’ political motives also make a tremendous difference, if individuals have a vested interest in certain outcomes, or there are one or more coalitions present, behavior in the decision making process could be altered. Emergent group characteristics The model differentiates two categories