Nancy got the idea of job sharing after seeing another pair of employees at the Library job sharing successfully and suggested it to management. Although there were negative feelings about the prospect of it working, management left the decision  open. Nancy went on maternity leave in September 1979 without a decision about whether her position would be posted as a job share. Finally, one week before Nancy was to return to work, a part-time job was posted to fill the job share.

Nancy returned from maternity leave to work full-time until the other part-time position was filled three months later by Kim Moden. Kim, having worked in the Library of Congress’ intern program from 1971-1976, learned about the job share position when she attended a reunion party for her intern class. Kim had a 2-year old and a 3-year old and the idea of returning to work part-time appealed to her. She was eventually selected for the position and reported to work in March 1980. At the outset, their supervisors were so pessimistic about the prospects of the new arrangement working that they limited the job share to a one year appointment (at the end of the year, Kim had to reapply for the job). Kim recalls that management watched them very closely that first year.

A 10-day pay period would be completed with each working 5 days (Kim worked 2 days one week and Nancy worked the other 3; the next week, Kim worked 3 days and Nancy worked 2).

The two rather quickly created a system of communication that worked for them. Their primary mode of communication consisted of leaving each other detailed notes about the upcoming events they were planning. This involved a lot of written documentation so each could know, at a glance, what was done and could determine the next steps. Frequently, calls were made home to one another, too. "Voice mail later gave us another way to communicate efficiently without having to actually connect with one another. Voice mail also saved us some time and effort in having to write everything down, but in the beginning those detailed notes were our lifeline," said Kim.

When asked about initial adjustments, Nancy replied: "Actually, it was harder for others to get used to working with us than it was for us to get used to working with each other. We became effective very quickly, to the point of being interchangeable. It took a while for people to understand how well-informed we kept each other. Finally it got to the point where others realized we were interchangeable. We knew this happened when people would forget exactly which one of us they were in a meeting with or which one they last communicated with about a matter."

Nancy and Kim attribute their success in sharing a job for 16 years to several factors. One contributing factor is their mutual suitability to the job. They both have good organization skills, are detail-oriented and flexible, and good at following through — qualities essential for the Special Events Coordinator job.

Equally important, however, in contributing to their success is that they both wanted it to work, so they helped each other. "For instance, let’s say either one of us got out of a meeting at 5 and wanted to go home? Well, we knew we’d better stay and document all the information the partner needed for the next day or we might negate the job share," said Kim.

Added Nancy: "Competition was never an issue between us. It has survived because we had similar priorities. Our priorities in job sharing were to have time with our families. Since the situation worked so well in giving us what we wanted, we both did whatever we had to in order to make it work. Now if one of us had been more ambitious than the other, that might have sabotaged it. We were in this for the same reasons. And of course, we are very compatible."

One challenge they had to contend with was that management expected 100% coverage. Scheduling vacations and sick leave could be difficult since one of them always had to be there, unlike the individual full-time person who is sometimes on leave and not available. Approved to work up to 32 hours a week, they often extended their regular schedules (i.e., 16 hours one week and 24 hours one week in a pay period) either to cover for the other or to keep up with workloads. And in 1983 when Nancy went on maternity leave after the birth of her second child, Kim worked full-time.

Was the job share situation ever threatened? "No. Managers knew a lot of work was getting done here and that they could depend on us being organized. We are regarded as hard working and responsive," replied Nancy.

Today, serving as Director Chiefs since 1989, they have one assistant, one secretary,  and one accounting clerk. Initially, they had to contend with the belief among management that two people could not share a supervisory position, but Nancy and Kim never doubted it. "Certainly if you can share all the minute details of coordinating an event, you can share supervising," Kim said.

By 1996, things began to shift. Not only was the workload increasing, but Nancy and Kim were both facing the prospects of financing kids through college. They also found themselves a little less tied down at home and starting to think more seriously about building their nest eggs for retirement. These factors led to their mutual decisions to return to work full-time.

Actually, Kim was the first one ready to work full-time again in 1996 (her kids are a bit older so they were heading to college earlier). Nancy stayed part-time until 1997. After 16 years of sharing one desk with two nameplates, each got her own desk when Kim went full-time.

Today Nancy and Kim still share an office. Kim says, "Now we have our own distinct areas, but we’re both very flexible and can work on each other’s projects. Now we don’t have to spend so much time communicating with one another, but our plates are very full. There are just so many more events now — more outreach, more conferences, more exhibits, more lectures. We organized 429 events last year, up from 375 in 1997," said Kim.

"We’ve always had to work twice as fast and twice as efficiently — to cut right to the point and often work right through lunch. But the events we plan today are more complicated," said Nancy. Before,having a few more days off a week helped them to cope, to get some necessary respite from the job. Being back full-time seems a grueling pace. This leads them to believe that the persons who will fill their places when they leave will have tough acts to follow!

Do they have any advice for others who want to job share? "Anyone who wants to job share has to be well-matched with each other and with the job. In our case, we used notes to organize and we tended to double- and triple-check. If one forgot, the other remembered," said Kim. "Job sharers should really comprehend, too, that they share one job. Each one has to be willing to work in the spirit of true partnership. It takes an extra effort to job share, but the advantages to both the employee and the agency are great."

"Unfortunately, though, despite seeing our success over the long term — I feel the mindset is still against job sharing. I think a problem is that a lot of supervisors won’t even try it. But I think if they did, they would see that it works. If employees want it to work, they will make it work. And the agency gets a lot of work out of two employees in one job," said Nancy.

With no kids at home to care for any-more, they spend more time with volunteer projects — Nancy with Boy Scouts, her son’s schools, and a local women’s shelter, and Kim with church, Meals on Wheels, and theatre. Nancy and Kim both feel thankful for having the opportunity to spend time with their children when they were growing up, but, as busy as they have been in and out of the job for all these hectic years, they definitely look forward to retirement!