One in two commercial partners has a negative view of the Law Society while a clear majority feel Chancery Lane is of little or no relevance to City law firms.

These are the key findings of Legal Week's latest Big Question survey, which found that 48% had a negative view of the work of the Law Society, including 23% that viewed its work as 'poor'. A further 30% said the body was 'OK', while 22% viewed its efforts as 'good' or 'excellent'.

In addition, 83% of partners feel that the Law Society has little or no relevance to commercial law firms, including 27% who believe it is 'not at all' relevant to the sector.

Despite a generally jaded view regarding the society, the findings, based on responses from more than 100 partners, found clear evidence that commercial partners want closer ties with Chancery Lane. Sixty-two percent of responding partners said they would like the Law Society to further engage and represent the commercial legal sector 'a lot' or 'to a considerable extent'. Only one in four partners said there was 'no need' for further engagement.

There was also considerable support for the role of a single body to represent all branches of the profession, with 50% seeing such a role as important and only 14% feeling it does not matter at all.

Slaughter and May executive partner Graham White said: "Over the past few years the Law Society has been much more conscious of the issues affecting the commercial firms and their concerns – evidenced by the appointment of a relationship manager concentrating on the commercial sector, for example – and in response there has been much more engagement by the larger firms with the Law Society. This has resulted in the Law Society becoming a powerful champion of the commercial law sector both with Government and regulators."

Hogan Lovells co-chair John Young said: "From my experience, the Law Society recognises that it must now actively justify its role in relation to commercial firms more than ever before. I certainly believe that it still has an important role to play. The challenge is to define that role more clearly and, in particular, how it is to dovetail with the role played by other bodies such as the City of London Law Society (CLLS)."

Pinsent Masons corporate partner and CLLS committee member Antoinette Jucker commented: "Historically there has been a lack of engagement between City firms and the Law Society, but I think that is changing in the sense that the City has woken up to the fact that it needs to be involved so that its views are heard on changes affecting the profession as a whole.

"However, I do feel that the Law Society still needs to work to assert its role as a representational body."

Regarding the value for money of the practising certificate fee, 59% thought it was 'poor' or 'could be better' while just 12% judged it as 'good' or 'excellent'.

Law Society chief executive Desmond Hudson commented: "The practising certificate largely covers the costs of regulation by the Solicitors Regulation Authority and the Law Society is constantly looking for ways to deliver more value for money to each and every member. One major success this year was to put an end to accountants' efforts to secure themselves legal privilege for work with their clients."

Partners on the Law Society

● 83% feel the Law Society has little or no relevance to commercial law firms
● 62% strongly favour more engagement with City firms
● 50% think it important to have a single body to represent the profession
● 48% believe the Law Society's work is 'poor' or 'could be better'