????相比之下，企業(yè)高管中的白人比例，要遠高于技術(shù)人員中的白人比例。

????該報告顯示，亞裔女性尤其面臨著種族歧視和性別歧視的“雙重打擊”。在這5家公司，每287名亞裔職場女性中，才會出現(xiàn)一名女性高管。相比之下，每123名白人職場女性中就會誕生一名女性高管。而對于白人男性來說，每87人中就會誕生一名高管。

????該分析主要針對亞裔族群所占的比重，部分原因是黑人和西班牙裔在高管層所占的比例很小，這使得這樣一份針對高管職位的研究“對微小變化非常敏感”。

????“平等”有時也是個會誤導人的詞。比如女性在科技公司往往代表性不足?！案吖芷降戎笖?shù)”只意味著各族群在高管職位和技術(shù)職位中所占的比例大致相等。因此，亞裔的平等指數(shù)之所以沒有達到1，是因為亞裔在高管層的13.9%和管理層的18.8%，均達不到亞裔普通員工在這5家公司中的比例（27.2%）。

????然而，根據(jù)美國人口統(tǒng)計局的數(shù)據(jù)，亞裔占美國總?cè)丝诘谋壤挥?.3%。所以相對于總?cè)丝诘谋壤齺碚f，他們的代表性不是過低，而是過高。白人雖然占了美國總?cè)丝诘?7.7%，但在硅谷卻只占了普通職業(yè)人士的62.2%、管理層的72.%和高管層的80.3%。

????該報告的作者也承認他們?nèi)狈ι鐣茖W的經(jīng)驗，同時他們認為，許多亞裔傾向于“忽視個人領導與組織能力對于獲得更高職位的重要性”。他們認為，這種現(xiàn)象的根本原因是“認知與預期的差異，而不是精英教育的失敗”。同時，很多非亞裔管理者存在著“盲目甚至錯誤的預期……由于大多數(shù)亞裔員工展示了出色的技術(shù)水平，因而以為他們更喜歡技術(shù)職位，而不熱衷于追求領導層職位?！?/p>

????當然，有些亞裔也已經(jīng)成功登上了硅谷企業(yè)的最高層，如微軟CEO薩塔亞?納德拉、Adobe公司CEO山塔努?納拉延、AMD公司CEO蘇姿豐等等。

????《財富》對這5家公司均進行了采訪，或請他們發(fā)表評論，以下是他們的回答：

?????谷歌在昨日發(fā)表博文稱，該公司已經(jīng)采取了幾項旨在增加員工團隊族群多元化的舉措。一位發(fā)言人也對《財富》表示：“2015年，我們打算在多元化問題上投入1.5億美元。但光靠錢本身解決不了問題——重要的是戰(zhàn)略和計劃?！?/p>

?????惠普沒有回復。

?????英特爾在一份聲明中表示：“英特爾致力于提升整個員工團隊的多元化和包容性”，該公司還計劃成立一個“3億美元的科技行業(yè)多元化基金”，以幫助代表性不足的少數(shù)族裔和女性到2020年前獲得更多工作機會。

?????LinkedIn在聲明中稱：“對LinkedIn來說，員工團隊的多元化和包容性是一個至關(guān)重要的問題?！痹摴颈硎菊谶@方面獲得進步，盡管它沒有公布近期的多元化數(shù)據(jù)，但“特別值得指出的是，領導層的亞裔人數(shù)有所增加?！?/p>

?????雅虎提到了它的“雅虎員工團隊多元化”網(wǎng)頁。（財富中文網(wǎng)）

????譯者：樸成奎

????審校：任文科

????Executives were far more likely to be white men than technical professionals were.

????Asian women, in particular, faced a “double whammy” of racial and sexual discrimination, according to the report. The study found there is only one Asian female executive for every 287 Asian women professional jobs at the five companies. By comparison, there was one white female executive for every 123 white women in professional jobs, Ascend said. The ratio for white men was one executive for every 87 professional jobs.

????The analysis focused primarily on Asian representation, at least in part because the total small executive representation of black and Hispanic men and women made an analysis of executive positions “highly sensitive to small changes.”

????The definition of parity can be misleading. For example, women are generally underrepresented in technology companies. Executive parity only means that they are in roughly the same percentage of executive roles as in technical roles. So, Asians aren’t at executive parity because the 13.9% in executive roles and 18.8% in management roles aren’t equal to the 27.2% in the professional workforce in these five companies.

????However, Asians make up only 5.3% of the total population, according to the Census Bureau, so in respect to the general population, they are overrepresented. Whites, who make up 77.7% of the general population, are 62.2% of the professional workforce, 72.7% of managers, and 80.3 percent of executives, according to the Ascend analysis.

????According to the authors, who note their lack of experience in social sciences, many Asians they have mentored or coached tend to “underappreciate the importance of personal and organizational leadership skills as requisites for higher management roles” and saw the root causes as “gaps in awareness and expectation rather than a failure of meritocracy.” At the same time, many non-Asian managers have an “implicit and often misguided expectation … that most Asians, by demonstrating technical excellence, prefer technical roles and do not aspire to leadership levels.”

????To be sure, there are Asians who have scaled the top of Silicon Valley companies, including Satya Nadella, Microsoft CEO, Shantanu Narayen, Adobe’s CEO, and Lisa T. Su, AMD’s CEO.

????Fortune asked each of the five companies for an interview or statement. Here are their responses:

?????Google: Referred to a blog post from yesterday addressing some steps it was taking to increase diversity. A company spokesperson also told Fortune “that we’re committing $150 Million to diversity in 2015″ but that “money alone won’t make the difference – it’s the strategy and plan that makes all the difference.”

?????Hewlett-Packard: Did not respond.

?????Intel: Sent a statement that said, in part, “Intel is committed to diversity and inclusion throughout our entire workforce” and that the company created a “$300 million diversity in technology fund” to help increase the number of under-represented minorities and women by the year 2020.

?????LinkedIn: A company statement called “[w]orkforce diversity and inclusion … a critically important issue for LinkedIn.” The company said it was making progress and that, while not having released its most recent diversity numbers yet, has “seen improvement specifically in the Asian leadership category.”

?????Yahoo: The company referred to its Workforce Diversity at Yahoo webpage.