The data librarianship as a profession produces on workloads can't give us the answers we seek. The library and information science literature wants two irreconcilable things out of its workload data: 1) aggregate comparable data to document and measure use of libraries and its value; and 2) accurate descriptions to document and measure the individual work done by librarians. That is our Gordian Knot. We propose here to change the question asked: how can we achieve a reasonable balance of workload within a group of librarians? That of course implies a focus on a library of a specific type: here a medium-sized academic library of an R2 institution. The goal was to answer a common and longstanding question: we are in continual process of assessing what needs to be done and how/where to shift workloads, but how do we know we're doing it in a reasonable and fair way beyond anecdotes and intuitions? We developed a weighted measure of public services workload in order to assess and track and assign a) areas of declining workload, b) areas of increasing workload (data services), and c) a balance between library divisions contributing to public services.