This week the Law Society has published the final report of its review of support for smaller firms.

It does not make comfortable reading for those of us who volunteer our time to serve on the Council, or for the committed staff who support us.As part of the review we asked NOP to undertake a postal survey of firms of up to ten partners, which covered their attitudes to the quality of service and support which they received from the Law Society.

The research showed that discontent with the Law Society by principals ranged from 30% (in four to five partner firms) to 58% (sole practitioners).The research suggests that the discontent arises not so much from dissatisfaction with specific services provided by the Law Society, as from a feeling that the Society inadequately supports small firms which supply a vital service of local access to law.But far too many principals did not know much about the services which the Law Society offers.

It is depressing to be condemned for not providing adequate services when there appears to be such widespread ignorance about what the Law Society actually can do.I suspect that the ignorance stems in part from low expectations.

In an exercise which we believe to be unprecedented on this scale, we are inviting every single member of the profession in England and Wales to meet the President or me during 1995 and 1996.In addition to the normal programme of visits to local law societies throughout the country by office-holders and management board members, meetings will be organised in venues throughout England and Wales.

The President and I are aiming to cover eight venues in each year.

Although there will be specific topics which we wish to present and discuss with those present, the purpose is primarily to listen to the membership.I think I already know some of the issues which will be raised because I (like the President) am a high street practitioner.

These issues are narrow or non-existent profit margins, particularly in conveyancing and legal aid work; over-regulation; not enough Law Society support geared to the needs of high street practices; and inadequate public recognition of the social importance of smaller practices.Let me mention each of these in turn.

I hope everybody is aware of the Society's concern about the precarious profitability of many high street practices.

I guess the Society's campaign for a better legal aid system is well-known.

However, it is surprising how many people still say that the Society has not confronted the problem of irresponsible cut-price conveyancing, although our working party's report, 'Adapting for the future', was sent to every practice.

Thousands of solicitors have attended meetings or sent in their comments about the consultation document.Nobody is more aware of the risk of over-regulation than I am.

We must all comply with the accounts rules, rule 15, the requirements of the Financial Services Act and all the rest of it.

I cannot promise instant de-regulation (although there is sympathy in the Council for a general move in that direction) but I can say that we are trying to develop a model which aims to cost the financial impact of any new Law Society regulation or practice standard.The model will need to be sufficiently sophisticated to illustrate the financial impact of regulation on firms and legal departments of differing sizes, and to take account of the varying stages of readiness for new regulation which are to be found in different firms.

The services provided by the Law Society in support of the profession must be relevant to its needs.

Wherever possible, those services must be provided in a businesslike way.

We are constantly trying to attune our services closely to the needs of the profession but we clearly can do still better.The recent successful launch of the Accident Line is an example of an appreciated service.

Our customer research also shows that members are particularly impressed with services received from the Law Society library.

We have recently expanded the office facilities available to members at the Law Society's Hall.

The Legal Practice Directorate has appointed IT and management advisers whose principal responsibility is to help the profession in the fast developing areas of IT systems, software implementation and training, client care and management systems.These examples show that we are not waiting until the roadshows start.

Furthermore, the Society is already auditing its communications with the profession, studying the tone, style, quality and frequency of them.

Some solicitors have complained that they hear from us too often and in a disorganised fashion.

We recognise that over-frequent communication can be counter-productive.

So the task is to communicate more effectively and to listen more.I will, however, enter a warning.

It is not easy for the Law Society to make policy which pleases everybody in the profession.

Almost any consultation we carry out (and any debate in the Council which follows) reveals split views.On whichever side the Council comes down, there will always be people who feel the Law Society has not listened to them, but in leading the profession, the Council and its staff always try to look to the profession's long-term interests rather than short-term popularity.

That places upon us a duty to recognise that only better communication and involving as many members as possible in the consultation process can mitigate the disappointment of those who feel they have not been listened to.You are welcome to write to me at the Law Society with your views and responses.