This study examined the causal attributions made by aggressive and non-aggressive individuals—as classified by a conditional reasoning measure of aggression—in response to incidents of subordinate success and failure. Following the presentation of traditional patterns of performance information (i.e., consensus, distinctiveness, and consistency), participants (N = 407) made attributions regarding the cause of the subordinate’s behavior and indicated their preferred behavioral intentions. Overall, when evaluating incidents of subordinate success, the causal attributions of aggressive individuals were similar to those of nonaggressive individuals. However, when evaluating incidents of subordinate failure, the causal attributions of aggressive individuals deviated from those of nonaggressive individuals for three information patterns. Moreover, following a person attribution, aggressive individuals were more likely to endorse punitive responses to incidents of subordinate failure. Implications, potential limitations, and directions for future research are discussed.