??? 過去幾年來，硅谷的種族多元化已經(jīng)演變成了一個(gè)大問題，當(dāng)然這個(gè)問題本身可以追溯到幾十年以前。早在互聯(lián)網(wǎng)熱潮方興未艾的1999年，《財(cái)富》就曾指出，很多硅谷企業(yè)甚至從來沒有考慮過讓其他族裔當(dāng)領(lǐng)導(dǎo)的事兒。

????近年來，情況總算有了些變化，至少這個(gè)問題受到了更多的關(guān)注。有些行業(yè)巨頭還發(fā)布了自己的多元化數(shù)據(jù)。《財(cái)富》也基于這項(xiàng)指標(biāo)對一些科技巨頭進(jìn)行了排名，但關(guān)注的焦點(diǎn)還是工程師和編程人員。

????一家名叫Ascend的泛亞商業(yè)人士組織近日發(fā)布報(bào)告稱，就總體而言，亞裔美國人的職場地位有所提高。不過，盡管他們占據(jù)了一些技術(shù)崗位，但這種進(jìn)步還未擴(kuò)展到高級職位上。

????該報(bào)告的執(zhí)筆人之一，思科系統(tǒng)公司前高管丹尼斯?佩克指出：“如果你走進(jìn)這5家公司的餐廳，你會發(fā)現(xiàn)那里有很多亞裔人才。但只有當(dāng)你走進(jìn)這些公司的高管辦公室時(shí)，你才會發(fā)現(xiàn)問題所在。”

????該報(bào)告的作者們分析了此前仍然保密的谷歌、惠普、英特爾、LinkedIn和雅虎這5家公司的EEOC數(shù)據(jù)（譯者注：EEOC意指美國均等就業(yè)機(jī)會委員會），這些數(shù)據(jù)涵蓋了139,370名職場人士。他們發(fā)現(xiàn)，白人占據(jù)了管理層（72.2%）和高管層（80.3%）的絕大部分崗位；在專業(yè)技術(shù)人才中，白人所占的比重為62.2%。相比之下，亞裔占了技術(shù)人才的27.2%，管理層的18.8%，高管層的13.9%。

????黑人、西班牙裔和其他種族共占技術(shù)人才的10.7%、管理層的7.3%、高管層的5.8%。

????該報(bào)告還基于種族和性別等指標(biāo)對相關(guān)數(shù)據(jù)進(jìn)行分類，并建立了“高管平等指數(shù)”，然后分別用每個(gè)族群的高管比例除以普通專業(yè)職位比例。如果結(jié)果是1，那就證明比例相等；如果大于1，那就證明高管的比例要大于普通專業(yè)職位的比例；如果小于1，則證明高管的比例小于普通專業(yè)職位的比例。高管平等指數(shù)越低，就說明該族群的人越難升到企業(yè)最高層。

??? Diversity in Silicon Valley has become a big issue in the last few years, although the problem itself goes back decades. In 1999, during the dotcom boom, Fortune pointed out thatrace wasn’t even on corporate agendas.

????Things have changed in some ways, at least in terms of attention. Some industry giants have published diversity data. Fortune has ranked some tech companies on diversity. But the focus primarily has been on engineers and programmers.

????In general, Asian-Americans have made progress in representation up to a point, according to a new reportfrom Ascend, a Pan-Asian organization for business professionals. While they have some strength in technical roles, the progress hasn’t extended to the upper ranks.

????“If you step in the cafeteria of any of these five companies, you will see plenty of Asian talent around,” Denise Peck, a study co-author and former Cisco Systems executive, told Associated Press. “It’s only when you walk into the executive suites at these companies that you might see a problem.”

????The authors crunched previously unavailable EEOC data for 2013 released by Google, Hewlett-Packard, Intel, LinkedIn, and Yahoo, which includes data for 139,370 professionals. They found that whites were overrepresented in management (72.2%) and executive (80.3%) roles compared to the 62.2% of professional technical staff they represented. And, they found that Asians were 27.2% of professionals, 18.8% of managers, and 13.9% of executives.

????Blacks, Hispanics, and individuals of other races were 10.7% of professionals, 7.3% of managers, and 5.8% of executives.

????The report also broke out representation by race and gender and then created an Executive Parity Index. The authors took each group and divided the percentage of professional workers they represented into their percentage of executives. The result would be 1 if the percentages were equal, greater than 1 if the percentage of executives was higher than the percentage of professionals, and less than 1 if the percentage of executives was lower. The lower the EPI, the less likely it was that someone would make it to the top.