There is a large and mostly invisible infrastructure of employment (and employment-related) legislation that for the most part will present obstacles to (a) more flexible and responsive vision(s).

Here's just one relatively obvious example. Job evaluation methods (the 'measurement' of the size, weight, importance of a job) derives directly from, and reinforces fundamental Taylorist hierarchy. How we look at and 'measure" jobs should change, and perhaps quite a bit, in an interconnected and networked environment.

BUT ... there is a federal law (in the USA, Canada and I think most if not all western European countries) mandating Equal Pay for Work of Equal Value. Guess what establishes 'equal value" ? And what's more, the generic job measurement factors contained in every job evaluation method (Skill, Effort, Responsibility and Working Conditions) are directly cited / referred to in the EPWEV legislation.

The HR world and HR management methods are almost entirely comprised of pre-network core assumptions about work, how it's done, how it's managed and why / how people are motivated to work.

Can o' worms, meet Gordian Knot ;-)