Getting away “Scott” (but not Susan) free: The effects of safety‐specific abusive supervision and supervisor gender on follower attributions and safety outcomes

Abstract

SummaryWhile most research emphasizes the harmful effects of abusive supervision, we argue that certain contextual factors—specifically hazardous work environments and supervisor gender—may lead abusive supervision to be perceived as driven by performance promotion intentions as opposed to injury initiation intentions. We introduce the concept of Safety‐Specific Abusive Supervision (SSAS), which we define as the extent to which a supervisor's active response to safety incidents is perceived by employees as abusive. Drawing from event system theory and research on attributions of abusive supervision, we theorize that when supervisors engage in SSAS, employees are more likely to attribute their behavior to performance promotion rather than injury initiation, perceiving the supervisors' actions as a means to keep them safe rather than to cause harm. We predict that performance promotion attributions mediate the relationship between SSAS and safety performance outcomes, namely safety voice and perceived supervisor safety commitment. However, consistent with role congruity theory, we hypothesize that this relationship is only true for male supervisors and not for female supervisors. Across three studies (two experimental studies and one field study), we largely find support for our hypotheses.