Will the "war for talent" go mainstream?

I have long suspected that the "war for talent" as fought in the 'noughties was actually restricted to a small cadre of (self defined ) individuals, but a new post by Clay Shirky in the McKinsey Quarterly got me thinking: - He notes (about the 'Net generation)

If I’m a 25-year-old and I’m sitting at my desk thinking, “I’ve been doing this job for two years, it’s time to look around for something else. I wonder what’s next for me,” it would be easier for me to find a better job in a different city, working for a different company, than to go into my own company and say, “Where’s a new job for me? How do I get a promotion?”

In part because companies just make the internal career path harder for all kinds of reasons—they don’t publish it as clearly, middle management is often worried about people trying to rise through the ranks. People think, “Oh, I can keep them there for a while because they’re useful in that position.”
If the search costs for finding a new job are easier outside your company than inside your company, you’re communicating something to them about loyalty as well. That’s another place where a manager can say, “Look, here’s how career paths go at this institution. Here are the skills you need, [and] here are the different departments we have.”

Interesting thought - as transaction costs lower for job finding externally, so internal retention suffers. Three barriers for this happening anytime soon:

(i) In theory its never been easier to find other opportunities, but the flipside (as anyone who has done recruiting will tell you) is that you get inundated with email resumes, so digging through the pile is impossible and you tend to do a cursory cull then home in on a few that exactly fit all your (supposed) requirements. In theory Social Media can get over this, but so far it's not (yet) the Go-To tool.

(ii) The next company is probably as likely to treat you the same as this company, so the other dimension that one needs to use new tech to find out is the culture of the intended target. It is easier to Google it and varuous whingesites help, but you are still only allowed so many hops per decade before you look like a gadfly

(iii) I'd predict a few unintended consequences too - extended trial periods and non permament contracts, and lock ins for minimum periods - or near zero investment in someone - as the costs per permament recruiting cycle are very high, and managers will probably also skew the pay for the 20% who they really, really want to keep.

Interesting dynamics nonetheless, I'd love for it to be true, sooner, as i think it would probably have the biggest impact on company culture in the longer term. Elsewhere Shirky makes the point that:

A famous observation about the net generation, the millennials, is, “They’re doing Facebook at their desks on a Tuesday morning,” which is certainly true. One of the reasons for that is that they’re also being asked to use PowerPoint in their homes on a Saturday afternoon. If you went to any manager and said, “Would you offer your 25-year-olds the following bargain: no more Facebook at work, and in return for which, I won’t call you after 6 PM or on weekends or ask you to watch e-mail.” I don’t think the managers would make that deal.

True enough, but it's not just the 'Net Generation who have had to be at their desks on an evening or weekend, Clay - that started with the floppy disk and telephone, and if you think Facebook is bad, try the gaming software!. Now when I were a lad we had it tough - weekend working and no Facebook, we had to socialise face to face with people. The horror...........