Robins & Boldero (2003) propose that dyadic relationships will become more intimate and trusting as the level of consistent commensurability of a person’s actual self, and perceptions of the other’s view of his or her actual self, increases. The implication for the development of authentic leader–member relationships in unconstrained settings is that followers and leaders will be most likely to form trusting and close relationships with persons who see them as they see themselves, i.e.—persons who see their true selves. Moreover, when ought selves serve as the source of commensurability, the follower will conclude the leader bhas the same standards as meQ (Robins & Boldero, 2003, p. 64), producing interpersonal feelings of justification. Finally, when the ideal selves serve as the source of commensurability, the follower will conclude that the leader bhas the same ideals and aspirations as meQ (p. 64) and experience feelings of cooperation and alliance. Thus, the highest levels of interpersonal trust, intimacy, cooperation, and goal alignment will be achieved when the follower and leader have congruent actual, ought and ideal selves. We believe such high levels of consistent commensurability are especially conducive to the formation of authentic leader–follower relationships, as both parties share similar ought and ideal selves, and accurately present and perceive their actual selves.
Particularly relevant to our focus on follower self-regulation are instances where ought and ideal selves of relational partners are congruent, but their actual selves are discrepant. Robins & Boldero
(2003) assert that this is the combination of actual selves and self-guides that is most likely to cause the partners to assume leader and follower roles. Essentially, by adopting the role of follower, the partner with the discrepant actual self is able to address the