PurposeAs hybrid organisations operating at the intersection of opposing institutional logics, social enterprises (SEs) pursue the creation of social value w hile functioning as businesses, which generates tensions between social and business concerns. Limited knowledge exists, however, of how hybridity is managed at the intra-individual level. Drawing on regulatory focus theory (RFT), this paper investigates the role of self-regulation in managing hybridity tensions in SEs.Design/methodology/approachA multiple-case design is useful in investigating the situated cognitive mechanisms underlying individual self-regulation in the context of managing tensions in SEs. The authors interviewed 22 managers from Belgian SEs that had been active in the home-care sector for at least five years before the COVID-19 pandemic to understand how managers handle the tensions between social and business concerns through self-regulation.FindingsThe authors show that managers in SEs experience three forms of tensioning: tensioning as intertwining, tensioning as competition and tensioning as superseding. Managers respond differently to tensions depending on their self-regulatory focus (promotion versus prevention) on social and business goals, and this is reflected in their hybridity practices (entrepreneurship, commercialisation, corporatisation and managerialisation). Informed by both social and business logics, hybridity practices serve as tactics used as part of managers' self-regulation, enabling them to handle tensions.Originality/valueBy studying the interactions between individual cognition and institutional logics, this study contributes to the micro-foundations of institutional logics by revealing the role of self-regulation mechanisms in managing tensions in hybrid organisations.