??? 過去幾年來，硅谷的種族多元化已經演變成了一個大問題，當然這個問題本身可以追溯到幾十年以前。早在互聯網熱潮方興未艾的1999年，《財富》就曾指出，很多硅谷企業甚至從來沒有考慮過讓其他族裔當領導的事兒。

????近年來，情況總算有了些變化，至少這個問題受到了更多的關注。有些行業巨頭還發布了自己的多元化數據。《財富》也基于這項指標對一些科技巨頭進行了排名，但關注的焦點還是工程師和編程人員。

????一家名叫Ascend的泛亞商業人士組織近日發布報告稱，就總體而言，亞裔美國人的職場地位有所提高。不過，盡管他們占據了一些技術崗位，但這種進步還未擴展到高級職位上。

????該報告的執筆人之一，思科系統公司前高管丹尼斯?佩克指出：“如果你走進這5家公司的餐廳，你會發現那里有很多亞裔人才。但只有當你走進這些公司的高管辦公室時，你才會發現問題所在。”

????該報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數據（譯者注：EEOC意指美國均等就業機會委員會），這些數據涵蓋了139,370名職場人士。他們發現，白人占據了管理層（72.2%）和高管層（80.3%）的絕大部分崗位；在專業技術人才中，白人所占的比重為62.2%。相比之下，亞裔占了技術人才的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人才的10.7%、管理層的7.3%、高管層的5.8%。

????該報告還基于種族和性別等指標對相關數據進行分類，并建立了“高管平等指數”，然后分別用每個族群的高管比例除以普通專業職位比例。如果結果是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職位的比例；如果小于1，則證明高管的比例小于普通專業職位的比例。高管平等指數越低，就說明該族群的人越難升到企業最高層。

??? 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.