I suppose one of the highest compliments you can pay a person is seeing a bit of yourself in them. That was my immediate impression of Kevin. Like myself he was a career changer, going back to school to get a formal degree in IT. While I admired his drive and can-do attitude and his temperament was well suited for the role I had for him, his technical skill level was not up to the requirements of the job, and I told him so. Within days of that assessment, he had returned with a JavaScript certification from BrainBench. That act of initiative sold me on him, and we brought him on board. Kevin is a patient student very meticulous in his work, and a consummate professional. I certainly do not hesitate in recommending him to any job that match his technical ability.

Kevin is highly professional in all of his dealings with co-workers and has an excellent phone-side manner when dealing with customers. While this might seem faint praise, I've seen many other software programmers speaking over the heads of those they were supposed to be helping and in time become mildly inpatient and condescending in their dealings with those who are less-informed on the subject at hand. His even temperament also makes him well suited for resolving problems and tasks which require a consistent effort over an extended period of time. For example, we had an issue with our tape backups where the job kept failing. A more educated and experienced but less patient resource (meaning myself) was not able to resolve this issue, despite taking several 'stabs at it'. Kevin didn't take a stab at it, but doggedly pursued the issue, and kept making incremental forward progress over the ensuing weeks until it was resolved. I have worked with many software developers, many of which who are naturally brilliant and for which assimilating new technology comes easy. Kevin is not one of them, but neither am I; in most cases I don't recommend working with these 'rock stars'. They bring problems of their own*, such as being easily bored, having an ego that requires constant stroking and care; authoring of overly complex solutions and generating over-engineered, unmanageable code. I belabor this point because of the premium placed on 'intelligence' in this field. If you're looking for a rock star, Kevin's not the best fit for your team. If you're looking for a dedicated professional developer who is advancing steadily on the learning curve, who shows up earlier than needed and stays later than required; who listens well and communicates effectively, then I highly recommend Kevin for a place on your team. *It might pay to recall that the documentary on Enron was called 'The Smartest Guys in the Room'

I suppose one of the highest compliments you can pay a person is seeing a bit of yourself in them. That was my immediate impression of Kevin. Like myself he was a career changer, going back to school to get a formal degree in IT. While I admired his drive and can-do attitude and his temperament was well suited for the role I had for him, his technical skill level was not up to the requirements of the job, and I told him so. Within days of that assessment, he had returned with a JavaScript certification from BrainBench. That act of initiative sold me on him, and we brought him on board. Kevin is a patient student very meticulous in his work, and a consummate professional. I certainly do not hesitate in recommending him to any job that match his technical ability.

Kevin is highly professional in all of his dealings with co-workers and has an excellent phone-side manner when dealing with customers. While this might seem faint praise, I've seen many other software programmers speaking over the heads of those they were supposed to be helping and in time become mildly inpatient and condescending in their dealings with those who are less-informed on the subject at hand. His even temperament also makes him well suited for resolving problems and tasks which require a consistent effort over an extended period of time. For example, we had an issue with our tape backups where the job kept failing. A more educated and experienced but less patient resource (meaning myself) was not able to resolve this issue, despite taking several 'stabs at it'. Kevin didn't take a stab at it, but doggedly pursued the issue, and kept making incremental forward progress over the ensuing weeks until it was resolved. I have worked with many software developers, many of which who are naturally brilliant and for which assimilating new technology comes easy. Kevin is not one of them, but neither am I; in most cases I don't recommend working with these 'rock stars'. They bring problems of their own*, such as being easily bored, having an ego that requires constant stroking and care; authoring of overly complex solutions and generating over-engineered, unmanageable code. I belabor this point because of the premium placed on 'intelligence' in this field. If you're looking for a rock star, Kevin's not the best fit for your team. If you're looking for a dedicated professional developer who is advancing steadily on the learning curve, who shows up earlier than needed and stays later than required; who listens well and communicates effectively, then I highly recommend Kevin for a place on your team. *It might pay to recall that the documentary on Enron was called 'The Smartest Guys in the Room'

I suppose one of the highest compliments you can pay a person is seeing a bit of yourself in them. That was my immediate impression of Kevin. Like myself he was a career changer, going back to school to get a formal degree in IT. While I admired his drive and can-do attitude and his temperament was well suited for the role I had for him, his technical skill level was not up to the requirements of the job, and I told him so. Within days of that assessment, he had returned with a JavaScript certification from BrainBench. That act of initiative sold me on him, and we brought him on board. Kevin is a patient student very meticulous in his work, and a consummate professional. I certainly do not hesitate in recommending him to any job that match his technical ability.

Kevin is highly professional in all of his dealings with co-workers and has an excellent phone-side manner when dealing with customers. While this might seem faint praise, I've seen many other software programmers speaking over the heads of those they were supposed to be helping and in time become mildly inpatient and condescending in their dealings with those who are less-informed on the subject at hand. His even temperament also makes him well suited for resolving problems and tasks which require a consistent effort over an extended period of time. For example, we had an issue with our tape backups where the job kept failing. A more educated and experienced but less patient resource (meaning myself) was not able to resolve this issue, despite taking several 'stabs at it'. Kevin didn't take a stab at it, but doggedly pursued the issue, and kept making incremental forward progress over the ensuing weeks until it was resolved. I have worked with many software developers, many of which who are naturally brilliant and for which assimilating new technology comes easy. Kevin is not one of them, but neither am I; in most cases I don't recommend working with these 'rock stars'. They bring problems of their own*, such as being easily bored, having an ego that requires constant stroking and care; authoring of overly complex solutions and generating over-engineered, unmanageable code. I belabor this point because of the premium placed on 'intelligence' in this field. If you're looking for a rock star, Kevin's not the best fit for your team. If you're looking for a dedicated professional developer who is advancing steadily on the learning curve, who shows up earlier than needed and stays later than required; who listens well and communicates effectively, then I highly recommend Kevin for a place on your team. *It might pay to recall that the documentary on Enron was called 'The Smartest Guys in the Room'