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

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.

Automated summary

This study aims to examine the impact of abusive supervision on insubordination, focusing on employees' attribution bias related to leader gender. The findings confirmed a three-way moderated mediation, indicating that the interaction among abusive supervision, leader gender and gender-leadership bias affects external attribution, leading to increased insubordination.