Organizations strive to make their work environment supportive of stability, trust, job security, administrative freedom, support and empowerment of employees in order to make them provide all the requirements for organizational success in order to achieve their goals.

Job bullying is a form of Organizational Behavior, and it exists and is widespread, whether management notices it or not, and in many organizations, almost private and public, and it is a negative behavior that management in the organization should seek to reduce and control it, and work to study and understand its causes and treatment in order to control and get rid of it instead of spreading in the organization and affecting organizational and administrative activities.

Administrative empowerment is one of the administrative practices that organizations seek to activate by expanding the powers of employees, motivating and training them, and working to achieve effective communication with them in order for the employee to be able to make the necessary decisions and solve problems, reducing the burden on managers, which facilitates the performance of the tasks assigned to them that are in the interest of the organization. 

Based on the above and after research and review of previous research and studies, and for the prominent role played by the administration of Salah al-Din governorate and its importance to the Iraqi citizen in this governorate, the contribution of this study stands out in revealing the impact of job bullying on the administrative empowerment of employees in the Office of Salah al-Din governorate, and contribute to finding ideas, recommendations and solutions that help control and limit job bullying and strive to achieve the principles and principles of administrative empowerment in it.

Study Problem

The employee is the main engine of any private or public organization. organizations and their departments must provide employees with a convenient, appropriate and safe working environment that enables them to assume responsibilities and perform their assigned tasks effectively and efficiently.   

Organizations should strive to control all the negatives and obstacles that exist in their internal environment and try to reduce them, discover their causes and address them in order for you to become a work environment in which it is convenient, appropriate and safe for job work in order to focus on achieving goals.

After the researcher conducted an oral survey and a search for the administrative reality in the Office of Salah al-Din governorate, there were signs indicating the existence of functional bullying, whether by managers or among employees, and this contributes to deviation in achieving the planned goals. Where the problem of studying is shown by the following main question:

• What is the correlation between job bullying and administrative empowerment in the Office of Salah al-Din governorate

The following sub-questions emerge from this main question:

• What is the correlation between job bullying and delegation of authority

• What is the correlation between job bullying and the culture of the organization

• What is the correlation between job bullying and work teams

• What is the correlation between functional bullying and effective communication

The Importance of Study: 

The significance of this study can be determined by the following:

• The scarcity of previous studies and research that dealt with the relationship between job bullying and administrative empowerment in the Salah al-Din governorate Office

• The importance of the study is shown by focusing on the administrative empowerment of the employees of Salah al-Din governorate and its reflection on the service and living reality of the citizen in this governorate

• Disclosure of the behavior of job bullying in the Office of Salah al-Din governorate

Objectives of the Study

This study aims to achieve the following:

• Clarify the relationship between job bullying and administrative empowerment in the Office of Salah al-Din governorate

• Contribute to finding ideas, recommendations and solutions to reduce the appearance of job bullying, reduce it and address its causes

• Highlighting the importance of administrative empowerment and its role in achieving the goals of the organization

Study Hypothesis

Based on what the problem dealt with for this study and the hypothesis scheme of variables and dimensions for this study, the hypotheses were formulated in the following way.

Main Hypothesis of the Study

There is a statistically significant effect between job bullying and administrative empowerment.

Sub-Hypotheses

• There is a statistically significant effect of job bullying on the delegation of authority

• There is a statistically significant impact of job bullying on the culture of the organization

• There is a statistically significant effect of job bullying on work teams

• There is a statistically significant effect of job bullying on effective communication

Conceptual Framework 

Job Bullying

The Concept of Job Bullying: Previous studies and research have dealt with many concepts of job bullying, and the researcher will choose a part of them, as the Norwegian scientist Olweus defined it as directing intentional and unwanted speech to another person who cannot defend himself and repeat it several times [1].

Bentley et al. [2] indicates that job bullying is a form of abuse, verbal abuse, and bad behavior that is directed by an individual or group of individuals towards another individual or group of other individuals on a recurring basis, often occurs in the workplace and has a serious impact on the individual and the organization.

Job bullying can also be defined as the tendencies of some managers, bosses or employers to try to dominate and control their employees and harass them by force, bullying, violence and abuse until the matter reached the point of leaving work by transfer or resignation by a significant number of employees because of their compulsive and psychological coercion [3].

It is also defined as a planned and intentional behavior aimed at causing harm and harm to others, whether direct or indirect, or whether this harm is physical or psychological, which is reflected, therefore, on the psychological state of the target person, for the purpose of achieving personal goals at the expense of others, which consequently affects the organization and its reputation, and this is reflected in the organization's environment being unstable and expelling manpower and competencies, thereby reducing productivity [4].

The researcher believes that job bullying is a passive-aggressive behavior in a way of dealing with others in the workplace, whether between employees or between the manager and the subordinate, and it is by using bad language, hurtful speech, constant criticism or undue pressure, and therefore leads to psychological or physical abuse, which causes psychological fatigue, exhaustion and physical fatigue, which is reflected negatively on the individual and the organization.

Indicators of the Presence of Functional Bullying in the Workplace

Where there are some indicators that indicate the presence of job bullying in the workplace, namely: 

• The increase in complaints and complaints from employees against managers and bossy employees

• A noticeable decrease in the performance of good and dedicated employees of the organization

• The level of tension between the members of one unit is noticeably high

• A decrease in the level of morale and passion of employees

• Fear and caution of a colleague in the workplace

• A marked increase in the number of cases of depression and isolation among employees

• An increase in the number of absences and attempts to leave work, resign or move to other organizations

Negative Effects of Job Bullying Behavior

Job bullying behaviors have a lot of negative and harmful effects on the individual and the organization and can be explained below.

Direct Effects

• Where organizations are negatively affected at the level of their performance, as a result of the impact of employees ' performance, their constant absence, complaining and psychological suffering, which reflects on the overall performance and causes organizations to have problems that need organizational solutions that cost the organization a lot [5]

• It affects individuals and their health and creates harmful and dangerous health problems and consequences for them

• Overwork and psycho-emotional and physical stress

• Problems of the individual in sleeping, whether it is excess sleep, laziness or insomnia (lack or lack of sleep)

It is worth noting that witnesses of job bullying behavior also suffer from negative effects, including a decrease in overall performance and psychological and emotional damage [6,7] 

Indirect Effects

• Abusive supervision can eventually lead to an impact on the family, the effects of which go beyond organizational boundaries

• A noticeable decrease in the performance of employees and therefore will be reflected on the performance of the organization

• Early retirement, litigation, overwork turnover, grievance, conflicts, which will distract the organization from achieving its goals

• Absence and constant interruptions from work

• Dissatisfaction, depression, feeling of bad treatment, which is reflected on the effectiveness and efficiency of employees

• Leaving the job, which leads to an increase in organizational and administrative costs [8,9]

Job satisfaction in the organization shows its importance by achieving the goals of the organization and increasing its percentage in the organization contributes to reducing the rates of absenteeism and continuing to work and also increases the ability of employees to creativity and innovation, thereby improving the organizational performance of the organization and achieving its goals. Here are our downsides to job bullying that causes low job satisfaction in an organization [10]. 

Dimensions of Job Bullying

Based on the studies, sources and scientific references reviewed by the researcher, the researcher has chosen the following dimensions [11-13]: 

Verbal Abuse

It is considered one of the means of bullying, controlling and bullying others and means that a person feels powerful and bossy when he offends another person and tries to detract from him in one way or another, and it can be abuse and abuse by shouting and shouting unjustified or verbal abuse or by disparagement and public ridicule. 

Constant Criticism

It is a method that makes employees lose their self-confidence and enthusiasm, where managers and supervisors are advised to use constructive criticism instead of continuous criticism so that the employee can absorb speech and respond positively, and continuous criticism is referred to as hurting and detracting from employees and trying to offend them continuously, which causes resignation, leaving work or moving to other organizations, which causes the organization to lose talented and competent people.

Denial of the Use of Resources

It is a negative and unjustified behavior practiced by some managers or employees who are bossy to some of the employees, which causes harm to the targeted employees and possible obstruction of work, so managers should pay attention and focus on these cases and provide what administrative units and employees need to complete their work and accomplish the tasks assigned to them.

Unjustified Pressure

Negative behavior exerted by managers and officials towards employees and workers regarding the pressure on them significantly or pressure on them with secondary particles, causing them some kind of harm and abuse or bullying and excessive control, which reflects negatively on individuals by trying to leave work or move, and this causes a lot of work turnover, increased costs and loss of competencies, which reflects negatively on the organization.

Administrative Empowerment

The Concept of Administrative Empowerment: Many studies and scientific references have dealt with the concept of administrative empowerment in various formats, and the researcher will address part of it, where he defined it [14] as granting authority to employees in setting goals for their work tasks and responsibilities, solving problems and making decisions.

Managerial empowerment is also known as the administrative process through which managers help employees acquire and use the authority and skills, they need in order to make decisions that affect them and also affect their work. 

They define it (rondolphus, sashrin) as the recognition of the employee's right to control and freedom, and this is something that a person possesses in terms of internal motivation, independent Will, knowledge and experience. 

Eccles defined it as giving employees the appropriate freedom of action, strength, authority and resources in order to make them employees who are able to effectively provide the organization's service [15]. 

The researcher believes that administrative empowerment means the process through which employees are given the powers to make decisions and solve problems in the tasks, work and responsibilities assigned to them in order to reduce the burden on managers and give freedom and authority to employees to achieve the goals of the organization.

Administrative Empowerment Objectives

There are a set of goals that organizations strive to achieve when applying administrative empowerment [16], namely: 

• Put the organization at the forefront and strive to become a leader in this field

• Trying to take advantage of the possibilities of human resources effectively

• The pursuit of an increase in sales, which provides an increase in profit, and this is what brings growth to the organization

• The main objective of administrative empowerment is to provide human resources that are able to produce goods and services effectively and efficiently and meet the needs and expectations of customers

Administrative Empowerment Models

There are many models that have appeared in administrative empowerment, the most prominent of which are discussed below.

The Perlin and Harris Model of Empowerment

This model identified three components that must be available in order to achieve empowerment: authority, accountability and capacity. It means ability: it is the possession of skills and knowledge in order to accomplish tasks. And authority: is to give subordinates freedom and strength to make decisions and accomplish tasks. Accountability: an employee learns responsibility in order to accomplish tasks and duties [17]. 

Tom Peter’s Model of the Empowerment Process

He presented a model of managerial empowerment based on two basic elements: involving individuals working in everything in the organization, and working on the use of self-managed work teams. To help develop and increase the effectiveness of teams at work, Peter advises working on listening well to working individuals, appreciating their efforts, paying attention to polarization, training and motivation. In order to achieve and maintain managerial empowerment Peter warns against the use of complex and rigid organizational structures, lack of clarity of middle management, professional conditions [18]. 

The Gradual Empowerment Model

This model is based on the basis that empowerment is gradual and needs a certain time, and it is according to certain gradual steps, where the organization cannot move from being an impossible organization to a directly possible organization, where Spector has presented its own model based on the take-over and abandonment rule, which means that the management assumes its strategic responsibility and the working individuals set the goals assigned to them. The management abandons attention to detail and gives it to working individuals and provides them with information and resources to give them confidence and ability [19].

Dimensions of Administrative Empowerment

After reviewing the previous studies and scientific references, the researcher dealt with the following dimensions [20-22]: 

Delegation of Authority

It is one of the important things and is considered one of the successful methods taken by the administration when it carries out the reform process.it is a motivating process for work and for showing abilities and not monopolizing power with one hand. this is what enables individual abilities and talents to appear and survive. Delegation does not mean leaving the matter without planning and communication, but it means giving one of the employees an appropriate amount of authority to perform a certain task and announcing this to the employees involved in the task to ensure that administrative responsibility is not shirked, while managers retain full responsibility, considering that there is a delegation of authority, not responsibility, as powers are granted for a specific period and a specific goal [23]. It can be noted the role of senior management in providing the appropriate organizational climate that promotes attachment to the organization, practices of ideal influence, inspiring motivation and intellectual excitement that enable solving problems and facing outstanding issues, which reflects positively on the reality of the organization [24]. 

Organizational Culture

It means the extent to which the organizational culture of the organization is able to promote empowerment, as the organizational culture, which is characterized by strength and control, cannot provide a valid and appropriate environment for the success of empowerment, but it is quite possible that it is one of the obstacles to empowerment, as the success of the empowerment strategy depends on the environment of the organization and the method followed for the empowerment process. If the successful and appropriate method of the empowerment strategy is used, it will achieve the promotion of improving the organization's activities, but if the inappropriate method is used, the empowerment process can fail, and confidence within the organization is shaken. In the end, the empowerment strategy cannot be implemented in isolation from the organizational environment [25]. 

Work Teams

It is a group of individuals who work together to achieve a general goal of the group and the organization, and it is considered one of the elements of strength in the application of empowerment, and this is because of the important role of working as a team in facing problems and rationalizing the use of resources efficiently and effectively. The employees ' shared sense of collective responsibility resulting from working as a team achieves real strength and results in achieving improvement and strengthening loyalty and commitment, and also contributes to solving problems and enables integration into the vision and striving to achieve it, activating self-control within teams and the individual's sense of responsibility within the team with the leader's commitment to provide the necessary supplies and overcome difficulties in order to achieve the goal [26,27].

Effective Communication

It is carried out between two parties in a mutual way and provides data and information, exchange and transfer between the individual and the group in the organization, which contributes to improving behavior and promoting effective work, as effective communication in the organization promotes creativity and innovation, and works to shorten a lot of efforts, as facilitating the process of transferring and exchanging data and information and the speed of obtaining it for each individual in the organization contributes to improving and enhancing empowerment, and also contributes to the transfer of ideas and directions of the leader effectively, which helps to achieve the goal of communication [28].

Conclusion

A phenomenon has spread in organizations, the tendencies of some managers and employers to seek to control and dominate employees and perhaps harass them with the use of force and bullying, it is even possible to abuse words and actions, and it is also possible with administrative procedures until it comes to forcing the employee to lower his level of performance and productivity because of the abusive behaviors he was subjected to and the so-called job bullying, and it can develop to request a transfer or eventually to leave work, and all this makes the organization the biggest loser from this behavior and the appearance of this undesirable result. It can be pointed out that any employment contract between the organization and the employee includes the existence of mutual beliefs, contributions and obligations between the parties, called the psychological contract, and this will also be negatively affected by the presence of the above actions [29].

Organizations seek to facilitate their work by granting powers and delegation to employees in order to facilitate the completion of the tasks assigned to them and reduce procedures that would hinder and slow down work and facilitate problem solving in order for the organization to achieve its goals, and this procedure is called administrative empowerment, which has spread among business organizations for its benefit and success as a management method.

Where it becomes clear to us that job bullying is an undesirable condition in organizations that want to achieve their goals successfully and Excel, and that administrative empowerment was used by organizations to facilitate the completion of tasks by reducing routines and work procedures that are not necessary to accomplish tasks and achieve goals, and here we have a relationship, so organizations that are trying to facilitate their work procedures should activate administrative empowerment and control job bullying, especially in senior, middle and lower management.

Study Methodology and Data Collection Tool

The Study Method: The descriptive analytical method was used by the researcher in preparing for this study, where the researcher dealt with the study of this relationship and worked to explain its reasons and the extent of the correlation between its variables and dimensions based on studies, scientific sources and previous studies, Figure 1 shows the hypothetical model.

Figure 1: Hypothetical Model of the Study

Prepared by the researcher with reference to the studies [11-13,20-22,25].

Spatial and Temporal Boundaries of the Study

The spatial boundaries of this study were represented in the Salah al-Din governorate Office for the year 2025.

Data Collection Tool: the researcher used the questionnaire tool to collect the data of this study, which was designed specifically for this study, where Reliance was placed on sources, scientific studies and previous studies, which consisted of three sections:

• Demographic information

• The questionnaire of the independent variable, which is functional bullying and its dimensions (verbal abuse, constant criticism, denial of the use of resources, unjustified pressure) [11-13]

• The questionnaire of the dependent variable, which is administrative empowerment and its dimensions (delegation of authority, organizational culture, work teams, effective communication) [20-22,25]

Community and Sample Study

The community of this study consists of the administrative staff of the Salah al-Din governorate Office, and the sample of the study is a random sample.

The results of the honesty and stability test of the dimensions of the study variables is vivid and discussed in the section below.

Statistical analysis showed the results of the stability test by the Cronbach’s Alpha method, and the honesty test by its square root, respectively, as shown in Table 1.

It is clear from the Table 1 that the value of Alpha Cronbach ranged from 0.362 minimum, to 0.786 maximum, which is a high value for Alpha Cronbach, which indicates the stability and truthfulness of the statements and the possibility of relying on them. Since it is statistically recognized that the test statistic should not be less than 0,7, therefore these values are considered acceptable in a form that reflects the availability of reliability and confidence in the research variables and confirms their validity for the next stages of analysis.

Community and Sample Study

The community of this study consists of the administrative staff of the Salah al-Din governorate office. The random sample of the study consists of (150), which is the number to which the forms were distributed. the number of forms received amounted to 130 forms, of which only 120 were valid for analysis, representing the sample of analysis that was relied on in the analysis.

Descriptive Analysis of Personal Demographic Data of the Vocabulary of the Study Sample 

Table 2 shows a set of results, the most important of which with regard to gender, it was found that 87% of the total sample size was male, while 13% was female. With regard to the scientific qualification, it turned out that 3% of the total sample size were diploma holders, while 32% were Bachelor and higher studies holders, reflecting the inclusion of the study sample of scientific competencies qualified to answer the survey paragraphs objectively.

The Results of the Test of Study Assignments

Before addressing the test of the study assumptions, the nature (strength and direction) of the relationship between the study variables will be tested as a condition of the regression analysis, as described in Table 3 which shows the following:

• There is a significant correlation between job bullying and administrative empowerment, where the correlation coefficient was equal to 0.803, which is a significant d at a level less than 0.5

• There is a significant correlation between job bullying and delegation of authority, where the correlation coefficient was equal to 0.778, a significant d at a level below 0.5

• There is a statistically significant correlation between job bullying and the culture of the organization, where the correlation coefficient was equal to 0.780, which is a significant d at a level below 0.5

• There is a significant correlation between job bullying and work teams, where the correlation coefficient was equal to 0.845, which is a significant d at a level below 0.5

• There is a significant correlation between functional bullying and effective communication, where the correlation coefficient was equal to 0.845, which is a significant d at a level below 0.5

Table 1: Honesty and constancy test

Table 2: Frequency distributions and percentages of demographic variables

Table 3: Correlation matrix between the study variables

** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)

Table 4: Impact of job bullying on administrative empowerment

R2 = 0.178                                                adj. R2= 0.149                                       F(sig.) = 60.206                                                             (0.00)

Table 5: Effect of job bullying on the delegation of authority

R2 = 0. 370                                              adj. R2= 0348                                        F(sig.) = 16.878                                                             (0.00)

Table 6: Impact of job bullying on the culture of the organization

R2 = 0.36                                                   adj. R2= 0.03                                          F(sig.) = 11.833                                                             (0.00)

Table 7: Effect of job bullying on work teams

R2 = 0.057                                                adj. R2= 0.05                                          F(sig.) = 11.737                                                             (0.01)

Table No. (8)

The results of the analysis of the presence of a statistically significant effect of job bullying on effective communication

R2 = 0. 47                                                 adj. R2 = 0.014                                      F(sig.) = 11.433                                                             (0.02)

Testing the Main Hypothesis

We had a main hypothesis to test that there is a statistically significant effect of job bullying on administrative empowerment. Regression analysis showed the results of testing this hypothesis as shown in Table 4 which shows the following:

• The significance of the regression model, where the value of (F) = 60.206, is significant at a significance level of 0.01

• The moral impact of the dimensions of functional bullying on the delegation of authority as one of the dimensions of administrative empowerment, where the value of(T) was 1.496 for the dimension of verbal abuse, at a moral level of 0.04, the value of (T) =2.64 for the dimension of continuous criticism, at a moral level of 0.05, the value of (T) =2.62 for the dimension of deprivation of the use of resources, at a moral level of 0.05, the value of (T) =4.226 for the dimension of the morale level is 0.00, which means that there is a moral impact of the dimensions of job bullying on the delegation of authority as one of the dimensions of administrative empowerment

• The coefficient of explanation reached R2 (0.149), which means that the dimensions of job bullying explain 14% of the variation in administrative empowerment, the rest of the percentage is due to other variables not addressed by the model

From the above, it is clear that the validity of the assumption is accepted, as it was found that there is a moral impact of the dimensions of job bullying on administrative empowerment at a moral level of less than 5%.

The First Sub-Hypothesis

First sub hypothesis was if there is a statistically significant effect of job bullying on the delegation of authority. Regression analysis showed the results of testing this hypothesis as shown in Table 5 which shows the following:

• The significance of the regression model, where the value of (F) = 16.878, is significant at a significance level of 0.01

• The moral impact of the dimensions of functional bullying on the delegation of authority as one of the dimensions of administrative empowerment, where the value of(T) was 0.211 for the dimension of verbal abuse, at a moral level of 0.02, the value of (T) =2.112 for the dimension of constant criticism, at a moral level of 0.05, the value of (T) =3.51 for the dimension of deprivation of the use of resources, at a moral level of 0.03, the value of (T) =7.769 for the dimension of undue pressure, and at a morale level of 0.00, this means that there is a moral impact of the dimensions of job bullying on the delegation of authority as one of the dimensions of administrative empowerment

• The coefficient of interpretation reached R2 (0.37), which means that the dimensions of job bullying explain 37% of the variation in delegation of authority as one of the dimensions of administrative empowerment, while the rest of the percentage is due to other variables not addressed by the model

From the above, it is clear that the validity of the assumption is accepted, as it was found that there is a moral impact of the dimensions of job bullying on the delegation of authority as one of the dimensions of administrative empowerment at a moral level of less than 5%.

The Second Sub-Hypothesis

Second sub hypothesis was if there is a statistically significant effect of job bullying on the culture of the organization. Regression analysis showed the results of testing this hypothesis as shown in Table 6 which shows the following:

• The significance of the regression model, where the value of (F) = 11.833, is significant at a significance level of 0.00

• The moral impact of the dimensions of functional bullying on the delegation of authority as one of the dimensions of administrative empowerment, where the value of(T) was 1.849 for the dimension of verbal abuse, at a moral level of 0.05, the value of (T) =1.129 for the dimension of continuous criticism, at a moral level of 0.02, the value of (T) =1.053 for the dimension of deprivation of the use of resources, at a moral level of 0.04, the value of (T) =1.438 for the dimension of undue pressure this is at a morale level of 0.02, which means that there is a moral impact of the dimensions of job bullying on the delegation of authority as one of the dimensions of administrative empowerment

• The coefficient of interpretation reached R2 (0.36), which means that the dimensions of job bullying explain 36% of the variation in delegation of authority as one of the dimensions of administrative empowerment, while the rest of the percentage is due to other variables not addressed by the model

From the above, it is clear that the validity of the assumption is accepted, as it was found that there is a moral impact of the dimensions of job bullying on the delegation of authority as one of the dimensions of administrative empowerment at a moral level of less than 5%.

The Third Sub-Hypothesis

Third sub hypothesis was there is a statistically significant effect of job bullying on work teams. Regression analysis showed the results of testing this hypothesis as shown in Table 7 which shows the following:

• The significance of the regression model, where the value of (F) = 11.737, which is not significant at a significance level of 0.01

• The moral impact of the dimensions of functional bullying on the delegation of authority as one of the dimensions of administrative empowerment, where the value of(T) was 1.534 for the dimension of verbal abuse, at a moral level of 0.01, the value of (T) =1.213 for the dimension of constant criticism, at a moral level of 0.03, the value of (T) =1.746 for the dimension of deprivation of the use of resources, at a moral level of 0.04, the value of (T) =0.697 for the dimension of undue pressure this is at a morale level of 0.04, which means that there is a moral impact of the dimensions of job bullying on the delegation of authority as one of the dimensions of administrative empowerment

• The coefficient of interpretation reached R2 (0.05), which means that the dimensions of job bullying explain 5% of the variation in delegation of authority as one of the dimensions of administrative empowerment, while the rest of the percentage is due to other variables not addressed by the model

   

From the above, it is clear that the validity of the assumption is accepted, as it was found that there is a moral impact of the dimensions of job bullying on the delegation of authority as one of the dimensions of administrative empowerment at a moral level of less than 5%.

The Fourth Sub-Hypothesis

Fourth sub hypothesis was there is a statistically significant effect of functional bullying on effective communication. Regression analysis showed the results of testing this hypothesis as shown in Table 8 which shows the following:

• The significance of the regression model, where the value of (F) = 11.433, is significant at a significance level of 0.02

• The moral impact of the dimensions of functional bullying on the delegation of authority as one of the dimensions of administrative empowerment, where the value of(T) was 0.322 for the dimension of verbal abuse, at a moral level of 0.05, the value of (T) =1.121) for the dimension of constant criticism, at a moral level of 0.02, the value of (T) =1.346) for the dimension of deprivation of the use of resources, at a moral level of 0.03, the value of (T) =1.248) for the dimension of undue pressure this is at a morale level of 0.02, which means that there is a moral impact of the dimensions of job bullying on the delegation of authority as one of the dimensions of administrative empowerment

• The coefficient of interpretation reached R2 (0.47), which means that the dimensions of job bullying explain 4% of the variation in delegation of authority as one of the dimensions of administrative empowerment, while the rest of the percentage is due to other variables not addressed by the model

From the above, it is clear that the validity of the assumption is accepted, as it was found that there is a moral impact of the dimensions of job bullying on the delegation of authority as one of the dimensions of administrative empowerment at a moral level of less than 5%.

• The presence of job bullying in the organization has a negative impact on managerial empowerment

• Verbal abuse reduces the employee's desire to delegate authority, through their loss of confidence in management and thus the inability to make a decisive decision

• The constant presence of criticism causes the formation of a negative work environment, in which a culture of anxiety and fear is common, and this affects the organization's culture based on cooperation and innovation

• The presence of undue pressure can cause teams to break up, and this is due to the difficulty of cooperation between team members due to constant pressure and tension

• Depriving employees of the use of resources causes shortfalls in the performance of their functions and causes them to reduce the ability of effective communication, thereby hampering the functional interaction between employees

• Job bullying causes a deterioration of the entire institutional performance

Recommendations

• Promote the pursuit of providing a positive work environment in which the fight against job bullying in all its forms appears, address the cases that occur, and work to raise awareness among working individuals to combat this condition

• Promote and support a culture of appreciation and mutual respect between all employees and managers

• Improve the work of work teams and enhance cooperation between them, and work to redistribute the pressure of job work in a balanced manner

• Improve the internal communication system between employees and managers, and encourage effective meetings with open and constructive discussions

• Strengthen the delegation of authority and be thoughtful, and work to provide training programs for employees and managers

• Promote the provision of the necessary resources for employees to perform their work efficiently

• The organization adopts comprehensive and integrated strategies that improve the work environment, combat job bullying and enhance administrative empowerment

1. Yeh, C.W., and C.Y. Wang. “The influence of workplace bullying to job stress in Taiwan.” Economic World, vol. 2, no. 2, 2014, pp. 92-99.

2. Bentley, T.A. et al. “Perceptions of workplace bullying in the New Zealand travel industry: Prevalence and management strategies.” Tourism Management, vol. 35, 2012, pp. 351-360.

3. Maghar, Abdulwahab. “Career bullying—An approaching theory.” Research Journal Humanities, no. 43, 2015.

4. Abdullah, Hussein Ali. Questioning in the Workplace and Its Role in Negative Work Behaviors. Master’s thesis, Faculty of Management and Economics, Department of Business Administration, Karbala University, Iraq, 2018.

5. Ismail, Ammar Fathi Moussi. “The role of spiritual leadership in reducing the bullying behaviors of employees at Sadat City University.” Journal of Financial and Commercial Research, no. 18, pt. II, 2017, pp. 127-171.

6. Matthiesen, S.B., and S. Einarsen. “Psychiatric distress and symptoms of PTSD among victims of bullying at work.” British Journal of Guidance & Counselling, vol. 32, 2004, pp. 335-356.

7. Totterdell, P., et al. “Can employees be emotionally drained by witnessing unpleasant interactions between coworkers? A diary study of induced emotion regulation.” Work and Stress, vol. 26, 2012, pp. 112-129.

8. Arcangeli, Giulio, et al. “Prevalenza del fenomeno mobbing in una popolazione di infermieri di tre aziende ospedaliere italiane [Prevalence of workplace bullying in a population of nurses at three Italian hospitals].” Giornale Italiano di Medicina del Lavoro ed Ergonomia, vol. 36, no. 3, 2014, pp. 181-185.

9. Nielsen, M.B., and S. Knardahl. “Is workplace bullying related to the personality traits of victims? A two-year prospective study.” Work and Stress, vol. 29, 2015, pp. 128-149.

10. Hussein, Y.A. “The role of job satisfaction in enhancing the quality of job performance: An applied study in Iraqi universities.” World Economics and Finance Bulletin, no. 9, 2022, pp. 138-146.

11. Al-Baidari, Jehan Zorro Saadou. Job Bullying Behavior and Its Role in Organizational Loyalty: An Analytical Study of the Opinions of a Sample of Teachers in a Number of Colleges at the University of Duhok. University of Duhok, Kurdistan Region of Iraq, 2021.

12. Faik, Dalia Khalid. “The role of job bullying in promoting the intention to leave work.” Erbil Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, Ceyhan University, 2022.

13. Al-Naimi, Abdulkader, and Shoaib Ahmed Aziz. “The impact of job bullying in job commitment: A survey study of the opinions of a sample of employees in the General Directorate of Babylon Education.” Journal of Rafidain Development, vol. 73, no. 111, 2018.

14. Taifour, Haifa. “Administrative empowerment of women academic leaders.” Al-Resala Journal for Humanitarian Studies and Research, vol. 2, no. 8, 2018.

15. Al-Saadi, Moayyed Naama. Intellectual Developments in Organizational Behavior and Human Resources Management. 1st ed., Dar al-Warraq, Jordan, 2010.

16. Rizkallah, Hanan. The Impact of Administrative Empowerment on Improving the Quality of Educational Service at the University: A Field Study on a Sample of Faculties of the University of Mentore. Master’s thesis, Faculty of Economics and Management Sciences, Mentore University, Constantine, 2010.

17. Al-Shamrani, Mohammed bin Musfer. The Educated Organization and Its Relationship to Employee Empowerment: A Comparative Survey Study on Employees of the Directorate General of Civil Defense and the Ministry of Interior Agency for Civil Status. PhD thesis (unpublished), NAIF University for Security Sciences, Saudi Arabia, 2014.

18. Al-Jumaili, Matar bin Abdulmohsen. Leadership Styles and Their Relationship in Empowerment Levels from the Point of View of Shura Council Employees. Master’s thesis, Graduate School, NAIF University for Security Sciences, Saudi Arabia, 2008.

19. Al-Qahtani, Mohammed Mana. Empowerment and Its Relationship to Organizational Loyalty from the Point of View of Officers Working at the Directorate General of Passports. Master’s thesis (unpublished), NAIF University for Security Sciences, Saudi Arabia, 2013.

20. Buqadi, Ahlam. Administrative Empowerment and Its Relationship to Organizational Creativity: A Field Study in Youth Institutions/Umm Al-Buaki State. Master’s thesis, Faculty of Social Sciences and Humanities, Arab bin Mehidi University, Umm Al-Buaki, 2019.

21. Ben Sidira, Noureddine. The Role of Managerial Empowerment in Achieving Competitive Advantage. Master’s thesis, 2015.

22. Uqba, Haba. Administrative Empowerment and Its Impact on the Quality of Services: A Field Study of the Directorate of Social Affairs, Sonatrach Health Department. Master’s thesis, Faculty of Economic, Commercial and Management Sciences, Mohammed Khidr University, Sakra, 2016.

23. Rady, Jawad Mohsen. “Administrative empowerment and its relationship to the creativity of employees: A field study on a sample of employees of the Faculty of Management and Economics.” Qadisiyah Journal of Administrative and Economic Sciences, vol. 12, no. 1, 2012.

24. Hussein, Y.A., and R. Kammoun. “Talent management and job engagement: The mediating effect of transformational leadership—An analysis of Tikrit University faculty perspectives.” International Journal of eBusiness and eGovernment Studies, vol. 16, no. 1, 2024, pp. 1-25.

25. Mahmoud, Samah Moayed, and Aseel Hadi Mahmoud. “The impact of empowerment factors in enhancing leadership traits: An analytical study of the opinions of managers working in the Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research.” Journal of Management and Economics, Mustansiriya University, Iraq, 2007.

26. Aref, Alia Abdul Hamid. Employee Empowerment and Application Requirements in Egyptian Organizations. PhD thesis (unpublished), Ain Al-Shams University, Egypt, 2004.

27. Mostafa, Ahmed Sayed. Organizational Behavior Management: A Contemporary View of People's Behavior at Work. New Maadi, Cairo, Egypt, 2005.

28. Al-Rashoudi, Khalid Suleiman. The Elements of Empowerment in Educational Security Organizations and Their Readiness to Apply It. Master’s thesis, NAIF University for Security Sciences, Saudi Arabia, 2009.

29. Hussein, Y.A. “The effect of violating the psychological contract on organizational citizenship: An applied study on the employees of ministerial contracts in Iraqi universities.” 2022.