The Impact of Abusive Supervision and Locus of Control on Budgetary Slack

Fitri Mareta, Aldini Nofta Martini, Aryan Danil Mirza. BR


Previous research has shown that budgetary slack behavior is motivated by external factors based on employee preferences or internal factors. Abusive supervision and locus of control are two aspects that have the potential to be the cause of budgetary slack creation. This research aims to investigate the impact on the propensity of individuals (abusive supervision and locus of control) to execute budgetary slack. Furthermore, this research also explores the role of the individual locus of control through abusive oversight of the tendency to handle budgetary slack. Until now, no research has been conducted to investigate the role of the individual locus of control in reaction to abusive supervision that facilitates budgetary slack activity. This research used a 2 x 2 experimental method among 51 Accounting master students as participants to test the hypothesis. The findings show that the tendency to create budgetary slack is not significantly influenced by abusive supervision, whereas the locus of control has a major impact on the tendency to generate budgetary slack. Furthermore, it was also found that the propensity to create budgetary slack is influenced by interaction of abusive supervision and locus of control. In an attempt to reduce employee budget discrepancies, this analysis contributes empirically and theoretically by being the framework for consideration in the company.


abusive supervision, locus of control, budgetary slack

Full Text:



Anthony,Robert N Govindarajan, V. (2007). Management Control Systems - Book - Harvard Business School. In McGraw-Hill/Irwin.

Bandura, A. (1977). Social Learning Theory. New Jesey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Biemann, T., Kearney, E., & Marggraf, K. (2015). Empowering leadership and managers’ career perceptions: Examining effects at both the individual and the team level. Leadership Quarterly, 26(5), 775–789.

Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. In Exchange and Power in Social Life.

Breevaart, K., & de Vries, R. E. (2017). Supervisor’s HEXACO personality traits and subordinate perceptions of abusive supervision. Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 28, pp. 691–700.

Church, B. K., Kuang, X. (Jason), & Liu, Y. (Sarah). (2019). The effects of measurement basis and slack benefits on honesty in budget reporting. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 72, 74–84.

Cropanzano, R., & Mitchell, M. S. (2005). Social exchange theory: An Interdisciplinary review. Journal of Management, 31(6), 874–900.

Cyert, R., & March, J. (1963). Behavioral Theory of The Firm. Organizational Behavior 2: Essential Theories of Process and Structure, pp. 1–445.

Domino, M. A., Wingreen, S. C., & Blanton, J. E. (2015). Social Cognitive Theory: The Antecedents and Effects of Ethical Climate Fit on Organizational Attitudes of Corporate Accounting Professionals—A Reflection of Client Narcissism and Fraud Attitude Risk. Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 131, pp. 453–467.

Haas, E. J., & Yorio, P. L. (2019). The role of risk avoidance and locus of control in workers’ near miss experiences: Implications for improving safety management systems. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 59(October 2018), 91–99.

Hobson, J. L., Mellon, M. J., & Stevens, D. E. (2011). Determinants of moral judgments regarding budgetary slack: An experimental examination of pay scheme and personal values. Behavioral Research in Accounting, 23(1), 87–107.

Johnson, G. H., & McGill, G. . (1988). An abbreviated locus of control measurement scale.

Johnson, R. E., Rosen, C. C., Chang, C.-H. (Daisy), & Lin, S.-H. (Joanna). (2015). Getting to the core of locus of control: Is it an evaluation of the self or the environment? Journal of Applied Psychology, 100(5), 1568–1578.

Kesavayuth, D., Ko, K. M., & Zikos, V. (2018). Locus of control and financial risk attitudes. Economic Modelling, 72(December 2017), 122–131.

Kiazad, K., Restubog, S. L., Zagencyk, T. J., Kiewitz, C., & Tang, R. L. (2010). In pursuit of power: The role of authoritarian leadership in the relationship between supervisors’ Machiavellianism and subordinates’ perceptions of abusive supervisory behavior. Journal of Research in Personality, 44(4), 512–519.

Maiga, A. S., & Jacobs, F. A. (2008). Assessing JIT Performance: An Econometric Approach. Journal of Management Accounting Research, 20(s1), 47–59.

Mitchell, M. S., & Ambrose, M. L. (2007). Abusive Supervision and Workplace Deviance and the Moderating Effects of Negative Reciprocity Beliefs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(4), 1159–1168.

Mudrack, P. E. (1990). Machivellianism and Locus of Control: A Meta-Analytic Review. The Journal of Social Phychology, 1(130), 125–126.

Ng, T. W. H., Sorensen, K. L., & Eby, L. t. (2006). Locus of control at work: a meta-analysis. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27, 1057–1087.

Park, J., & Kim, H. J. (2019). How and when does abusive supervision affect hospitality employees’ service sabotage? International Journal of Hospitality Management, 83(March 2018), 190–197.

Phares, E. J. (1976). Locus of control in personality. Roberts, J. A., Lapidus, R. S., & Chonko, L. B. (1997). Salespeople and Stress: The Moderating Role of Locus of Control on Work Stressors and Felt Stress. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 5(3), 93–108.

Rotter, J. B. (1966). Generalize D Expectancie S for Interna L Versus. 80(1).

Skarlicki, D. P., & Folger, R. (2004). Broadening our understanding of organizational retaliatory behaviors. New York: Jossey-Bass: In R. W. Griffin & A. M. O’Leary-Kelly (Eds.) The dark side of organizational behavior.

Spreitzer, G. M. (1995). Psychological Empowerment in the Workplace : Dimensions, Measurement, and Validation. Academy of Management Journal, 38(5), 1442–1465.

Stevens, D. E. (2002). The effects of reputation and ethics on budgetary slack. Journal of Management Accounting Research,. Ournal of Management Accounting Research, 14(1), 153–171.

Tepper, B. J. (2000). Consequences of abusive supervision. Academy of Management Journal, 43(2), 178–190.

Thau, S., & Mitchell, M. S. (2010). Self-Gain or Self-Regulation Impairment? Tests of Competing Explanations of the Supervisor Abuse and Employee Deviance Relationship Through Perceptions of Distributive Justice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(6), 1009–1031.

Turnipseed, D. L., & Bacon, C. M. (2009). Relation of organizational citizenship behavior and locus of control. Psychological Reports, 105(3), 857–864.

Van Der Stede, W. A. (2000). The relationship between two consequences of budgetary controls: Budgetary slack creation and managerial short-term orientation. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 25(6), 609–622.

Watkins, T., Fehr, R., & He, W. (2019). Whatever it takes: Leaders’ perceptions of abusive supervision instrumentality. Leadership Quarterly, 30(2), 260–272.

Zellars, K. L., Tepper, B. J., & Duffy, M. K. (2002). Abusive supervision and subordinates’ organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(6), 1068–1076.



  • There are currently no refbacks.


The Indonesian Journal of Accounting Research (IJAR)

Editorial Secretariat

Master of Science and Doctoral Programs
Faculty of Economics and Business, Gadjah Mada University

Jl. Nusantara, Bulaksumur Yogyakarta 55281
CP : Novita
Phone  : +62 85227764898
Fax    : +62 274 524606
Email  :

Marketing and Sales Office

Ikatan Akuntan Indonesia
Graha Akuntan, Jl. Sindanglaya No.1 Menteng, Jakarta Pusat 10310
CP : Reza Fauzi
Divisi Pelayanan, Keanggotaan dan Mitra IAI.
Grha Akuntan, Jl. Sindanglaya No.1, Menteng.
Telp.021-31904232 Ext.324/321



ISSN 2086-6887 (Print)
ISSN 2655 - 1748 (online)


Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.