Victim precipitation theory postulates that to fully understand why abusive supervision occurs, it is imperative to consider how subordinates can participate in the sequence of events that lead to their becoming targets of supervisors’ aggressive actions. Yet, only a handful of studies have explored whether subordinates’ own behaviours might evoke this type of response. To this end, this dissertation explored if, and under what conditions, subordinates’ behaviours elicited abusive responses from their supervisors. Drawing on the taxonomy of upward influence tactics, I tested the role of assertiveness and ingratiation as two behavioural predictors of abuse across two independent studies. In Study 1, I collected self-report data from a sample of full-time supervisors using Amazon’s Mechanical Turk platform (N = 204). Relying solely on their subjective interpretations, supervisors who perceived their subordinates to be assertive reported being more abusive because this behaviour threatened their role in the organization. On the other hand, supervisors who believed their subordinates ingratiated towards them were less likely to be abusive because they viewed these individuals as less threatening. Because abusive supervision is frequently observed from the subordinates’ perspective, and because there is evidence to suggest that abuse should be examined from a relational perspective, Study 2 collected responses from supervisor-subordinate dyads (N = 146). In this study, subordinates’ self-ratings of assertiveness were the only behaviour that was directly related to abusive supervision. Moreover, across both studies, there was no evidence to support the assertion that supervisor perceptions of power in the organization, or their social dominance orientation moderated the indirect relationship between assertiveness and abusive supervision through perceived threat. Theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed.