Quality-Diversity (QD) algorithms are a new type of Evolutionary Algorithms (EAs), aiming to find a set of high-performing, yet diverse solutions. They have found many successful applications in reinforcement learning and robotics, helping improve the robustness in complex environments. Furthermore, they often empirically find a better overall solution than traditional search algorithms which explicitly search for a single highest-performing solution. However, their theoretical analysis is far behind, leaving many fundamental questions unexplored. In this paper, we try to shed some light on the optimization ability of QD algorithms via rigorous running time analysis. By comparing the popular QD algorithm MAP-Elites with $(\mu+1)$-EA (a typical EA focusing on finding better objective values only), we prove that on two NP-hard problem classes with wide applications, i.e., monotone approximately submodular maximization with a size constraint, and set cover, MAP-Elites can achieve the (asymptotically) optimal polynomial-time approximation ratio, while $(\mu+1)$-EA requires exponential expected time on some instances. This provides theoretical justification for that QD algorithms can be helpful for optimization, and discloses that the simultaneous search for high-performing solutions with diverse behaviors can provide stepping stones to good overall solutions and help avoid local optima.