The example you gave is a diversity of skills, and that diversity of skills was actually a requirement for your business. If the inclusion of individuals posses

The example you gave is a diversity of skills, and that diversity of skills was actually a requirement for your business. If the inclusion of individuals possessing those additional skills (ability to speak Spanish, ability to network effectively in a given foreign country/culture) happens to map on to a racial or ethnic diversity, great, but that's not what's being advocated for here. This also brings up an interesting point of contention. The diversity dance has 2 arguments at odds with themselves. Claim 1: All populations of people are inherently equivalent and should therefore have proportional representations in all things. Claim 2: Diversity is a boon because populations are inherently unique and provide a unique set of characteristics to the table. Pick one. You cannot make both of those claims simultaneously. You are advocating in favor of Claim 2, which is fine, but what if the position in question doesn't actually benefit from a diverse set of skills? What if it's a low level circuit designer that tends to favor a particular skillset and personality type? Is it not possible that attributes more commonly represented in a certain population might be overrepresented in sectors that require those characteristics? In contrast, if you advocate instead for Claim 1, then there should be no discernible advantage to diverse hiring, it's just that a failure to do so would be indicative of bias.