Supervisor social comparison orientation and abusive supervision: A dual-path model

Abusive supervision has been identified as a prevalent phenomenon in the hospitality sector, with detrimental consequences for both employees and organizations. Despite a substantial stream of research on this topic, few studies have examined the underlying triggers and mechanisms. Integrating social comparison theory with self-regulation theory, the current study explores a theoretical framework in which supervisor social comparison orientation leads to abusive supervision through two distinct paths. We propose that supervisors’ self-regulation strategies, namely rumination and reflection, are parallel mediators that differently influence their behavioral responses. Using a multi-source, three-wave, team-level research design, we collect matched data from 146 supervisor–subordinate teams drawn from several hotel enterprises across China. The results demonstrate that supervisor social comparison orientation induces abusive supervision through distinct paths: supervisors with a high social comparison orientation exhibit increased abusive supervision when engaging in rumination, but attenuated abusive supervision when engaging in reflection. Furthermore, an ethical climate moderates the positive relationship between rumination and abusive supervision. The theoretical contributions and practical implications are discussed. • Explores abusive supervision via social comparison theory with dual mediators: rumination and reflecltion. • Identifies the moderating role of ethical climate between supervisor rumination and abusive supervision. • A multi-source, three-wave, team-level research design was employed to collect data from 568 questionnaires.