I'm close with a principal engineering manager at a large tech company. At his level, bonuses are in part determined by hiring minorities (discriminating against whites, East Asians, men), and resumés are sorted by the same category to ensure some minimum of minorities are given an opportunity before a less racially desirable candidate even has a chance of being looked at.
IBM Red Hat is being sued for this, having stated workforce diversity goals of 30% female and 30% people of color. Executives have openly stated that bonuses are on the line if you hire too many white men.
For the last decade or so we haven't been able to state these things without being accused of racism or sexism. Ironically, my primary concern is that these sorts of policies make the problems of racism and sexism worse. Equality requires that we judge people on their merits.
At my FAANG company, our leadership is super unbalanced in favor of white/asian men.
We have some empty words about diversity but no goals or metrics, so nothing effective will actually change.
As a (white, male) manager, I have huge power over who gets to interview. My network is, sadly, largely white/asian and male. So if I don’t even think about it, I will perpetuate the imbalance.
I haven’t seen bonuses tied to diversity. I have seen a promo doc where a manager was praised for increasing diversity, with a greater percentage of women now in his department. I then discovered he had hired 1 woman and 26 men, raising his percentage of women from 0. I’m not kidding.
IBM Red Hat is being sued for this, having stated workforce diversity goals of 30% female and 30% people of color. Executives have openly stated that bonuses are on the line if you hire too many white men.
For the last decade or so we haven't been able to state these things without being accused of racism or sexism. Ironically, my primary concern is that these sorts of policies make the problems of racism and sexism worse. Equality requires that we judge people on their merits.