Linklaters & Alliance has long since been consigned to history. But as firms of all sizes try to reposition themselves in today's marketplace, Links seems to be making its best efforts to create a second version, albeit with a very different vision.

Its forthcoming alliance with South Africa's Webber Wentzel – just months after a similar tie-up with Australian leader Allens – means it has this year gained access to 1,000 lawyers in strategically touted markets with no financial outlay and no appreciable risk. 

And if the passing years show Linklaters needs more from the relationship than just an alliance, then it is well-positioned to turn it into something more (or perhaps cherry-pick choice individuals). 

The firm gains all of this without the difficulties of trying to grapple with large national partnerships and differing profitability – a criticism often levied against the October merger between Herbert Smith and Freehills.

Of course, you only need to look to the same firm – or indeed Pinsent Masons and Salans – to provide an example of the difficulties of alliances over mergers. Without the incentive of shared gains, matters can easily go wrong and, once they start unravelling, the absence of joint financial commitments makes it easy for all parties to walk away. 

Certainly, it is telling that Herbert Smith, Salans and Pinsents have subsequently opted for mergers, and high-stakes mergers in the former two cases.

Linklaters itself, of course, went down the merger route – with uneven results – with three former European alliance partners. But this is a very different model, with Linklaters regarding Australia and Africa as important, but not so core as Europe or Asia.

The only real question mark for the UK firm is whether ambitious rivals such as Clifford Chance and Allen & Overy will see greater long-term gains from their own smaller (but financially integrated) offerings and if it meets the rising challenge of truly global players such as Norton Rose Fulbright and DLA Piper.

More importantly, Linklaters' strategy raises some awkward strategic issues for smaller UK rivals. Just as Linklaters' decision must in part have been prompted by the wave of global mergers by firms not necessarily trying to be the best in each market but intent on being the biggest, it exacerbates the problem for those yet to commit to either route. 

There is space for only one or two outliers in each key market, and as the number of firms plugging the gaps in their international networks increases, so too does the pressure on everyone else.

The solution will differ whether you're looking at a firm such as Simmons & Simmons or SJ Berwin – where a merger is the likely answer – or a global leader in the vein of Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer. But all of these firms need to make a rapid decision on their global positioning or risk being outmanoeuvred.