Attributions for abusive supervision: Who do subordinates blame and does it matter?

Drawing on attribution theory, we propose in Study 1 that subordinates' supervisor-directed responses to abusive supervision depend upon their causal attributions for the abuse. Using a scenario-based study (N = 183), we test a moderated mediation model in which the entity blamed for abusive supervision (supervisor, organization, self) is expected to predict subordinates' behavioral intentions toward their supervisor via affective responses (supervisor disliking). This relationship will be exacerbated when subordinates perceive the cause of abusive supervision as stable. We found that subordinates who blamed themselves or the organization for the abuse disliked their supervisor less and had higher OCB-supervisor intentions, and this relationship was stronger when subordinates perceived the cause of abuse as stable. Disliking mediated the relationship between supervisor attributions and OCB-supervisor, but this relationship is not moderated by perceived stability. In Study 2, we explore whether there are additional entities that are blamed for abusive supervision and the reasons they are held accountable. We examined qualitative responses (N = 107) from abused subordinates to find that they most commonly blame their supervisor, themselves, and the organization for abusive supervision. However, subordinates occasionally blame their relationship with their supervisor and their work group.

Abusive supervision and subordinates' organization deviance.

The authors developed an integrated model of the relationships among abusive supervision, affective organizational commitment, norms toward organization deviance, and organization deviance and tested the framework in 2 studies: a 2-wave investigation of 243 supervised employees and a cross-sectional study of 247 employees organized into 68 work groups. Path analytic tests of mediated moderation provide support for the prediction that the mediated effect of abusive supervision on organization deviance (through affective commitment) is stronger when employees perceive that their coworkers are more approving of organization deviance (Study 1) and when coworkers perform more acts of organization deviance (Study 2).