An attribution account of the effects of leaders’ gender and abusive supervision on employee insubordination

Abstract

Purpose Drawing on attribution theory, this study aims to examine how and when abusive supervision affects insubordination, focusing on employees’ attribution bias related to leader gender. Design/methodology/approach Two mixed-method studies were used to test the proposed research framework. Study 1 adopted a 2 (abusive supervision: low vs high) by 2 (leader gender: male vs female) by employee gender-leadership bias quasi-experiment. A sample of 173 US F&B employees completed Study 1. In Study 2, 116 hospitality employees responded to two-wave, time-lagged surveys. They answered questions on abusive supervision and gender-leadership bias in Survey 1. Two weeks later, they reported negative external attribution (embodied in injury initiation) and insubordination. Findings Hayes’ PROCESS macro results verified a three-way moderated mediation. The three-way interaction among abusive supervision, leader gender and gender-leadership bias affects external attribution, increasing insubordination. Employees with high leader–gender bias working under female leaders make more external attribution and engage in subsequent insubordination in the presence of abusive supervision. Originality/value This study is one of the first, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, that examines the mediating role of external attribution of abusive supervision. Second, this research explains the gender glass ceiling by examining employees’ attribution bias against female leaders.

Who wreaks more havoc? Gender and the detrimental effect of abusive supervision on interpersonal deviance

“…As assertive and aggressive behavior is more in line with the male leaders' gender stereotype (Eagly et al, 2020), male leaders' abusive supervision is more predictable and socially acceptable (Yun and Shum, 2023). In contrast, abusive supervision negatively violates the communal expectation for female leaders, which is less socially acceptable than that for male leaders (Yun and Shum, 2023). Furthermore, expectation violation theory (Jussim et al, 1987) contends that individuals GM 39,4 react more negatively to those who display negative counter-stereotypical traits than to those who display negative stereotypical traits (Schaumberg and Flynn, 2017).…”

“…In gender stereotypes, abusive supervision is viewed as negatively violates the communal expectation for female leaders and more aligned with the male leaders' stereotypes (Yun and Shum, 2023). Male subordinates who hold strong gender stereotypes and gender role expectations are more likely to view abusive supervision as incongruent with female leaders' gender roles and congruent with male leaders' gender roles.…”

“…assertive, controlling, confident and individualistic). As assertive and aggressive behavior is more in line with the male leaders’ gender stereotype (Eagly et al , 2020), male leaders’ abusive supervision is more predictable and socially acceptable (Yun and Shum, 2023). In contrast, abusive supervision negatively violates the communal expectation for female leaders, which is less socially acceptable than that for male leaders (Yun and Shum, 2023).…”