I won't pretend this is a universal truth, but often code that is quicker and easier to design is quicker and easier to read and understand. A language with less necessary boilerplate can take less reading to understand. Maybe you have a clever IDE that folds away boilerplate code for your chosen language, so that may not always apply.
Lisp originated as an intermediate code. It's basically an s-expression encoding of an AST. There was at one time a frontend planned, but people started writing all sorts of code directly in Lisp.
If your developers don't understand any layers of the stack below their own input, that's a bad thing. Lisp's interpretation or compilation is largely tied more or less directly to the input syntax. It's a language made powerful by the interactions of a handful of first-class concepts being allowed to interact with few artificial limits. Once your developers understand those concepts, it's pretty easily read except perhaps deeply nested constructs.
There are those in our industry to whom it is important to write code fast, and those who think focus should be on reading and understanding code.