[e_proxus]

There's obviously a scale of how things are at various workplaces, and how acceptable various things are in different cultures.

I've worked at a gaming company in Europe before where among other things female team members told me they've been asked by someone "how it feels to have the biggest boobs in the team" when another female in the team left.

The company later introduced an inclusivity effort and a code of conduct, and felt obliged to offer an AMA (because "new and scary thing" or whatever). They got questions like "should we now lower our hiring standards because we want to hire more women?" and "will there be any punishments if you break the CoC?" to which the answer was "of course not, don't worry". It felt like they just did these things to show an effort, not to actually follow through on them. Leadership was of course all white middle-age straight male.

[ethbro]

There are a number of studies that show that implementing new guidelines / yearly rote training is about the least effective thing you can do to change corporate culture.

The most effective tends to be non-adversarial, regular peer meetings where actual discussions can be had.

And yet every enterprise I've ever worked at has the same canned training systems. Or implements them in response to an incident.

[softawre]

Do companies care about being effective or care about covering their liability?

[mrguyorama]

The company doesn't have to care for certain specific/influential people at the company to care and make healthy culture.

Company culture is it's employees, All the way from CEO to janitor.