Leadership development perspective of adult learning philosophies

In view of the impact of philosophies ofn adult learning on leadership development practices, this article evaluates the humanistic philosophy of adult learning as tacit philosophy of a leadership development program. This research contributes to the discourse on leadership development by introducing adult learning philosophies as multidisciplinary insights in leadership development. It also explores the leadership development utility of the humanistic philosophy of adult learning by synthesizing its taxonomy from the work of Abraham Maslow, Carl Rogers, and Malcolm Knowles. This taxonomy classifies the philosophy in motivational drivers, learning-fostering vs. learning discouraging forces, pro-learning attributes (e.g., developing knowledge of the actual and ideal self), pro-learning conditions (e.g., self-directed learning), experiential learning and output evaluation. The taxonomy is used to evaluate the leadership development utility of the humanistic philosophy of adult learning by: (a) Evaluating the literature on empirical support for this philosophy; (b) Comparing its scope against that of a leadership development program; and (c) Evaluating its potential as a remedy for the failure of leadership development programs. Finally, the summary discusses the theoretical and practical implications of the evaluations. It proposes complementary streams of future research to deepen the evaluation of the humanistic philosophy of adult learning and to evaluate the leadership development utility of other philosophies of adult learning. •The taxonomy of the HPAL enriches the discourse on leadership development with a new conceptual framework and concepts.•A literature review evaluation of relevant research found empirical support for important HPAL concepts and assumptions.•An evaluation of the scope of the taxonomy concludes that its scope is not too narrow for the leadership development program.•The article supports the proposition that organizational-level structural and cultural dynamics influence the effectiveness of leadership development programs.