Perceived and Actual Value Congruence Are Not the Same Thing

A recent systematic review of leader–follower value congruence argues that two different forms of alignment need to be kept apart: perceived congruence and actual congruence. Perceived congruence refers to a person’s felt sense of alignment. Actual congruence refers to a more structural comparison between two value profiles. The review argues that these are distinct but related constructs, and that research has focused far more on the perceived form than on the actual one. For Point of Value, this is highly relevant because it suggests that the experience of alignment and the measured structure of alignment should not automatically be treated as the same thing. (sciencedirect.com)

What the study says

In their 2025 review, Allan Lee and colleagues examine how the literature on leader–follower value congruence has developed and where its main conceptual and methodological weaknesses lie. One of their clearest contributions is the distinction between perceived value congruence and actual value congruence. Perceived congruence is typically captured through follower self-reports and reflects a person’s subjective sense of alignment. Actual congruence, by contrast, is captured through direct comparisons of leader and follower value profiles. (sciencedirect.com)

The review also shows that the field has been disproportionately focused on perceived congruence. In the studies included, perceived congruence accounted for just over 60 per cent of the literature, while actual congruence accounted for less than 38 per cent. Only a very small minority of studies examined both forms together. The authors’ point is not that one form is valid and the other invalid, but that they answer different questions and should not be collapsed into a single idea of “fit”. (sciencedirect.com)

Why it matters

For practice, this distinction matters because it protects us from a common simplification: the assumption that if someone feels aligned, there must also be strong structural alignment, or that if two profiles look similar on paper, the person must therefore experience meaningful alignment. The research suggests that these are different matters. A person may feel strongly aligned because of trust, identification, or relationship quality, even when structural overlap is modest. Equally, two profiles may appear relatively close while the person still experiences the context as strained, thin, or unlivable. (sciencedirect.com)

For facilitators, this means that experienced fit should not be dismissed simply because it is subjective. Perceived congruence may be subjective, but it is not trivial. It may tell us something highly relevant about trust, resonance, and day-to-day relational reality. At the same time, actual congruence can offer a more formal way of thinking about structural match and mismatch. For organisations, this opens a more mature conversation: not only whether people feel aligned, but how alignment may also be assessed in a more structured way. (sciencedirect.com)

Our take

From a Point of Value perspective, this distinction is not a threat to practice; it is a clarification. PoV has rightly devoted most of its attention to experienced alignment: whether a person can recognise themselves in their work, relationships, and organisational setting. That remains deeply important, because meaning, vitality, inner friction, and lived congruence are not captured adequately by structural comparison alone.

At the same time, the distinction invites a useful extension of thought. It suggests that PoV may benefit from speaking more explicitly about different kinds of congruence: the congruence a person experiences, the congruence that can be structurally compared, the values an organisation states, and the values it actually lives. That does not mean reducing values work to measurement. It means becoming clearer about what is being explored in dialogue and what, under some conditions, may also be examined analytically.

Source

Lee, A., Newman, A., Maio, G. R., Piplani, R. S., & Harvey, W. S. (2025). Leader-follower value congruence: A systematic review of the literature and a future research agenda. The Leadership Quarterly. (sciencedirect.com)