Obiter can let readers into a little secret in the legal reporting trade: survey stories are the worst. In general, they will consist of, say, a legal software provider which has surveyed law firms (often not many) and found by chance that what they all need is some more legal software. All too often polling companies are happy to go along with this charade for a hefty commissioning fee.

The other bugbear is when research produces results that are so blindingly obvious as to make them pointless writing up.

Take the Solicitors Regulation Authority’s latest groundbreaking piece of work on how small firms approach technology and innovation. You may need to find a seat before you hear the results of this one.

The 138 firms surveyed revealed that cost, uncertainty and a fear of investing in soon-to-be outdated systems are holding them back from adopting new technology. Many respondents said they lacked time, technical knowledge or confidence to choose the right tech.

The news that smaller firms don’t have the resources or expertise of larger firms is unlikely to be a revelation to many. We had not envisaged a sole practitioner from a rural practice being as tech-savvy as Silicon Valley.

So what have we learned from this research? The SRA’s response includes some excellent corporate jargon. ‘As part of our approach to communicating the findings from this research, we will engage with stakeholders on the research findings, to highlight that there are steps that key actors in the legal sector can take,’ the regulator said. ‘These can help to make a difference to promoting innovation and technology within smaller firms to benefit consumers of legal services.’

We look forward to the results, but in the meantime, would it be churlish to ask whether the SRA might simply focus on regulating and not spending its time (and solicitors’ money) coming up with this stuff?

Topics