1) You're somewhat right; 'displayed capability' would likely be better. 2) It doesn't have to be perfectly or flawlessly measurable to be worth measuring and

1) You're somewhat right; 'displayed capability' would likely be better. 2) It doesn't have to be perfectly or flawlessly measurable to be worth measuring and net a positive result. 3) There's definitely more measurable, tested validity behind typical 'meritocratic' factors used by employers for recruiting than there is for diversity. For example, does the average Stanford student vs NYU student have less differentiation than a Black vs White Stanford student? You're arguing against the 'measurability' and 'increased chance of success' of these factors (education, work experience) in favor of race or gender or sexual orientation. If you truly want diversity, you'd find much more of it from ten individuals of the same race who all originated from different countries with different cultures. The difference between Americans of different races, by comparison, is much, much smaller.