The first episode concluded with Heston Blumenthal's Popham menu being rejected by the Little Chef customers. Ironically the Little Chef boss - Ian Pegler - complained that he wanted "something more dramatic" despite the Blumenthal offering being clearly more dramatic than the usual fare. Heston Blumenthal said "I can't give up, the brand is iconic, it's an institution".

When last night's episode started, I wondered when they would get down to some proper market research and how the culture clash would unfold.

Heston came down to earth by focusing on the breakfast which is still Little Chef's mainstay. However it was clear that to improve it the staff would have to cook more than they are used to. When Heston tested some Little Chef staff to see if they could cook a seabream it was quite shocking. It was obvious that they have virtually no experience with cooking from fresh ingredients as all the fish ended up raw. Even if you were not used to cooking sea bream, it is obvious that you would test to see if the fish is cooked. The Fat Duck chef correctly summed it up as "they work in an environment that has been totally deskilled"...and yet the Little Chef manual prescribes how each element of the mixed grill is to be placed.

It was brave of Heston to chose Anne England, the veteran Little Chef employee, who was "truly the worst of the bunch". However if he can change her, he can change anybody! Given the lack of previous skill I thought she did not do too badly. I wonder what the Little Chef management said to the Popham staff about Anne's role. Did they tell their staff that her role was important and that it was essential that they support her, or was she simply introduced by an outsider (Heston)? Staff can be set up for failure if they are supposed to be instruments of change and those affected by change are not properly briefed.

When it came to the new breakfast in Popham it was certainly more promising than the previous attempt. Brushing thyme oil onto the tomatoes I thought was within the skills of the staff. However I simply did not understand how adding more flavour with a pipette made any sense in a fast food environment - far too time consuming and fiddly. A device to spray on the oil would have been more sensible.

They finally got off to do some market research well into the programme. They were filmed at what I thought was St Pancras station but they must have travelled from Kings Cross with their big coolboxes. While they were able to gauge public opinion I did wonder how their tests would relate to people halfway through a long drive on an A-road. The second phase of the market research at the rugby game was more sensible.

It was amusing how one guy who was queuing for a breakfast said "my wife's not here so I can eat it!". Many people I know who like Little Chef are those would would not dare eat a "heart attack on a plate" at home but would not hesitate to indulge when away. Of course the big result was that the rugby fans preferred the caravan that offered baked beans. However the result was good for Heston because clearly the use of better ingredients and cooking methods were noticed by the customers. One said "the bacon is good...the eggs are really good". That indicated that if the menu were used, there would probably be a fair bit of repeat business; though it would apparently be unwise to ignore baked beans completely.

However, I wonder if the market research would have been better done by putting the caravan in a Little Chef car park. The travelling public might react differently to those going to a rugby game.

The next interviews with Little Chef senior management were interesting. Ian Pegley said that Heston had "captured the essence of what this is about". To me that was a different signal than he gave when he was talking about "blue skies thinking" or was that just a throwaway buzzword?

The dynamics in the meeting room were very interesting. I had not twigged in the first episode that there was an "executive chef" in the room. Obviously somebody was responsible for the previous menus which were so slated in the first episode. Did Ian Pegley go over this guy's head (and thus humiliate him) to bring in Heston? Or was this guy the advocate of change but who left most of the communication to his boss? I was surprised at his comment that he was "disappointed with the wow factor". Was there a "wow factor" in the existing menu? Did he expect something really bizarre from a Little Chef kitchen? Heston rightly posed the question "are they really prepared to improve the quality of their cooking?" after the meeting.

Towards the end of the programme the relationship between Heston and Ian became strained almost to breaking point. I think the feeling that Little Chef wanted to steal Heston's ideas like liver & bacon or lamb shanks and then present it as their menu was justified. I would not trust that management team if I were contracted as a consultant and they put together an alternative plan without proper discussion. Heston was right to be aggrieved.

He was also right to request that the new breakfast could be rolled out beyond Popham. By using better ingredients and using mainly existing staff and equipment Heston had demonstrated that the better breakfast would satisfy the taste of the customers at Popham. The next stage would be to demonstrate that the ideas could be transported further afield.

However, given Little Chef's difficult finances I understood that there was a reluctance to try chain wide change until more of the menu was updated and put to a pilot test. Little Chef needs to revamp its kitchens and introduce more cooking skills. That would require a major capital investment.

As a good TV drama the penultimate episode ended in drama. However since there is a third episode and Mrs O tells me that the Popham Little Chef is being rebuilt, I can only conclude that the relationship between the protagonists was patched up...