According to [these comments from Todd](http://www.info-arch.org/lists/sigia-l/0607/0105.html), the “rating of business need” is implied in the colour of the tasks:

*Those prioritizations come from discussions with the business unit and are framed around the Customer and Business needs. So, if it’s a 1, it’s because both
the customer and business unit think we have to have it.*

The comprehensive nature of the Task Analysis Grid is what makes it works so well with clients. The most powerful thing it does it gets the team talking more about user behavior and less about specific requirements written in a 60 page requirement doc.

We typically develop the Grid during our research phase along with personas, so getting people to start talking/thinking about features at a behavioral level instead of specific technical requirements at that point makes sense. We don’t necessarily think this should be a replacement for a requirements document, but more of a precursor.

The one thing that I feel is missing is a rating of business need. The Grid does a good job of showing user need and value, but we have recently started adding a layer of business value to the mix, which seems to help show the bigger picture of importance based on both user need and value to the business.