Objective: This study examines the paradigmatic shift in Library and Information Science (LIS) from managing static information resources, characterized by fixed identity, well-defined boundaries, and stable metadata, to managing dynamic information flows generated by transformative technologies including the dynamic web, Internet of Things (IoT), social media, and generative artificial intelligence (GenAI). The study aims to redefine the role of librarians and information professionals in response to this transformation and address the growing disconnect between LIS education, research, and practice.
Method: This conceptual analysis adopts an interdisciplinary approach, synthesizing theoretical frameworks from data science, software engineering, social network analysis, communication studies, and LIS. The study reviews ontological theories of information flow alongside sociological theories. It employs comparative analysis between the traditional “access paradigm” and the emergent “information flow management paradigm”, examining their respective key questions, primary roles, tools, units of analysis, and temporal dimensions.
Results: The analysis reveals that dynamic information flows fundamentally challenge traditional LIS assumptions regarding information identity, retrieval models, needs assessment, and classification systems. Information units in dynamic flows possess momentary, context-dependent identities that elude traditional metadata schemas such as MARC and Dublin Core. The “store-then-retrieve” model is being superseded by “real-time monitoring–filtering–push” models, wherein information must be proactively channeled to users before explicit requests are articulated. Traditional needs assessment methods prove inadequate for identifying emerging patterns, while rigid subject classifications lose effectiveness against non-linear, tag-based interconnections. The findings demonstrate that LIS curricula, textbooks, and information systems remain predominantly designed around static resource management, despite practical organizational requirements to engage with dynamic flows.
Conclusions: This study concludes that LIS must redefine itself from a discipline focused on organizing static documents for future access to one actively engaged in monitoring, filtering, and directing dynamic information flows. The role of librarians and information professionals evolves from “gatekeeper” to “navigator”, a facilitator who determines what information should be retained, discarded, and to whom and when it should be delivered. This paradigm shift carries practical, theoretical, educational, and methodological implications requiring curricular redesign, adoption of computational research methods, and interdisciplinary engagement with data science and communication studies. Failure to address this transformation risks marginalizing the discipline, while proactive engagement offers opportunity to revitalize the strategic role of librarians and information professionals in the era of big data, IoT, and GenAI.