Job sharing

Job sharing is a flexible work arrangement in which two or more employees share the responsibilities, hours, and compensation of a single full-time position (Olmsted B., Smith S. 1994, p.78)^[1]. One person works Monday through Wednesday morning; their partner works Wednesday afternoon through Friday. The position gets covered full-time, but neither individual works full-time hours. For parents, students, near-retirees, and others seeking reduced schedules, job sharing offers continued employment without full-time commitment.

The arrangement remains relatively rare—only about 9% of employers have formal job sharing policies. But demand grows as workers increasingly prioritize flexibility and work-life balance. For employers, job sharing brings built-in backup, diverse perspectives, and access to talent unwilling or unable to work full-time schedules.

Structure and mechanics

Job sharing can be organized in various ways:

Schedule patterns

Split week. One partner works the first half of the week, the other the second half. A common pattern: Partner A works Monday-Tuesday plus Wednesday morning; Partner B works Wednesday afternoon through Friday^[2].

Alternate days. Partners work every other day or specific assigned days. Monday-Wednesday-Friday for one; Tuesday-Thursday for the other.

Alternate weeks. Less common—partners trade off entire weeks. Works for positions where weekly handoffs are practical.

Split day. One partner works mornings, the other afternoons. Extends coverage hours beyond normal full-time schedules.

Responsibility division

Shared responsibilities. Both partners perform the same duties, dividing work chronologically. Either can handle any task during their hours.

Divided responsibilities. Partners specialize in different aspects of the position based on skills or preferences. One handles client relationships; another handles analysis.

Hybrid model. Some responsibilities are shared (customer service); others are divided by expertise (technical vs. administrative tasks).

Benefits

Job sharing offers advantages to multiple parties:

For employees

Work-life balance. Reduced hours allow time for family, education, health needs, or personal interests. Parents can remain employed while present for children. Students can work while completing degrees^[3].

Career continuity. Rather than leaving the workforce entirely, workers maintain professional involvement, skills, and social connections. This preserves earnings potential and prevents career gaps.

Reduced stress. Fewer hours mean more recovery time. Shared responsibility provides backup during demanding periods.

Gradual retirement. Near-retirees can phase down gradually rather than stopping abruptly. They maintain income, benefits, and social engagement while reducing demands.

For employers

Talent access. Skilled workers who won't accept full-time positions become available through sharing arrangements. The talent pool expands.

Retention. Employees who would otherwise leave for reduced schedules stay. Retention savings (recruiting, training, institutional knowledge loss) can be substantial.

Coverage benefits. Built-in backup exists when one partner is ill or on vacation. Coverage extends more hours in split-day arrangements^[4].

Diverse perspectives. Two minds approach problems differently. Job sharing partners bring complementary viewpoints and skills.

Productivity maintenance. Part-time workers often produce proportionally more per hour than full-time equivalents, fresh rather than fatigued.

Challenges

Job sharing creates complications requiring management:

Communication requirements

Handoff coordination. Partners must communicate thoroughly about pending issues, client conversations, and workflow status. Poor handoffs create gaps and errors.

Documentation needs. Shared files, status reports, and communication logs become essential. What one partner knows, the other must access.

Meeting coordination. Important meetings may require both partners' attendance, complicating scheduling. Alternatively, one partner attends and briefs the other^[5].

Compatibility issues

Style differences. Partners with incompatible work styles frustrate each other and confuse colleagues. Decision-making approaches, communication styles, and quality standards must align.

Trust requirements. Partners depend on each other's reliability. An unreliable partner creates unfair burdens.

Conflict potential. Disagreements about approach, responsibility boundaries, or workload distribution can poison the arrangement.

Administrative complexity

Benefits costs. Two people receiving benefits for one position increases costs, though some benefits (particularly health insurance) may be shared or prorated.

Supervision burden. Managers must coordinate with two people rather than one. Feedback, development, and performance management become more complex.

Technology and logistics. Workspace, equipment, email access, and system logins require management.

Implementation requirements

Successful job sharing requires careful setup:

Partner selection

Complementary skills. Ideal partners have overlapping capabilities (to provide backup) but also complementary strengths (to add value)^[6].

Compatible styles. Work habits, communication preferences, and professional standards should align. Significant incompatibilities doom arrangements.

Mutual trust. Partners must trust each other's competence, reliability, and judgment. This often develops through prior acquaintance.

Agreement clarity

Schedule specification. Precisely defined schedules prevent confusion. Include provisions for schedule changes when necessary.

Responsibility allocation. Clear delineation of who handles what. Written agreements reduce disputes.

Communication protocols. How will partners keep each other informed? What documentation is required?

Evaluation processes. How will performance be assessed—individually, collectively, or both?

Organizational support

Management buy-in. Supervisors must support the arrangement and invest in coordination. Reluctant managers undermine success.

Colleague acceptance. Coworkers need to understand and work with the arrangement^[7].

Technology infrastructure. Shared access to files, communications, and systems enables seamless handoffs.

Suitable positions

Not all jobs accommodate sharing:

Good candidates

Routine operations. Positions with regular, predictable workflows transfer easily between partners.

Knowledge work. Professional roles where output matters more than presence often work well.

Customer service. Roles requiring coverage during business hours benefit from extended or continuous coverage.

Poor candidates

Crisis response. Positions requiring instant availability and quick decision-making fit poorly.

Highly autonomous roles. Jobs requiring singular vision or authority may not divide well.

Travel-intensive positions. Frequent travel makes coordination impractical^[8].

Emerging situations. Rapidly changing contexts with constant developments challenge handoffs.

Legal and policy considerations

Job sharing intersects with employment law:

Benefits eligibility. Prorated benefits for part-time workers follow organizational policy and legal requirements. ERISA and other regulations affect benefit provisions.

Overtime. When one partner's absence requires the other to work extra, overtime rules may apply.

Employment status. Both partners are typically employees, though some arrangements use contractor status for one partner.

Discrimination protection. Job sharing requests may intersect with accommodation requirements under ADA, pregnancy discrimination law, or family leave provisions.

Trends and future

Job sharing evolves with changing work patterns:

Technology enablement. Cloud collaboration, shared documents, and communication platforms make coordination easier than ever.

Pandemic effects. COVID-19 normalized flexible arrangements broadly, increasing acceptance of alternatives like job sharing.

Talent market pressure. Labor shortages push employers toward flexibility to attract and retain talent.

Generational preferences. Younger workers prioritize flexibility; accommodating them may require arrangements like job sharing.

Job sharing — recommended articles

Flexible work arrangements — Part-time employment — Work-life balance — Human resources management

References

• Olmsted B., Smith S. (1994), Creating a Flexible Workplace, 2nd Edition, AMACOM.
• OPM (2023), Part-Time and Job Sharing Guide, U.S. Office of Personnel Management.
• SHRM (2023), Flexible Work Arrangements, Society for Human Resource Management.
• Bailey D.E., Kurland N.B. (2002), A Review of Telework Research, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 23.

Footnotes

1. ↑ Olmsted B., Smith S. (1994), Creating a Flexible Workplace, p.78
2. ↑ OPM (2023), Part-Time and Job Sharing Guide
3. ↑ SHRM (2023), Flexible Work Arrangements
4. ↑ Olmsted B., Smith S. (1994), Creating a Flexible Workplace, pp.89-112
5. ↑ Bailey D.E., Kurland N.B. (2002), A Review of Telework Research, pp.383-400
6. ↑ OPM (2023), Part-Time and Job Sharing Guide
7. ↑ SHRM (2023), Flexible Work Arrangements
8. ↑ Olmsted B., Smith S. (1994), Creating a Flexible Workplace, pp.134-156

Author: Sławomir Wawak