This study focused on the issue of paradigms in Human Resource Development (HRD). Its purpose was to validate the HRD Cube as a synthesized model of HRD and to explicate some of the extant paradigms of HRD. The study was carried out by examining the text of articles published in Academy of Human Resource Development (AHRD)-sponsored journals. Purposeful, stratified, and random sampling was used to select 16 articles published in AHRD-sponsored journals. Articles were treated as if they were the representative voice(s) of their author(s). Data units from within each article were identified and coded using two sequential techniques. First, units were axially coded and sorted into one of seven pre-determined categories based on the axioms of theory, research, and practice. Second, units were open coded using the constant comparative method, and themes and sub-themes were developed. Axial coding results identified a heavy emphasis on practice. The accumulation of units representing research and theory were comparatively smaller. Evidence of shared perspectives was found that emphasized the practice axiom. The accumulation of units emphasized research-practice, followed by theory-practice, and concluded with theory-research. Data units were also found that described all three axioms concurrently, theory-research-practice. Open coding results identified representative themes and sub-themes within each of the axiom-based categories of theory, research, and practice. Six themes developed in the theory category, 9 themes and 1 sub-theme developed in the research category, and 6 themes and 10 sub-themes developed in the practice category. The results provide evidence to support the overall construction of the HRD Cube. Theory, research, and practice perspectives of HRD were represented within the 16 articles used. The results also support the components described on each side of the HRD Cube. On the theory side, people, processes, and outcomes, and informing disciplines of HRD, were identified. Post-positive, interpretive, and critical epistemologies were identified on the research side. Individual, group, organizational, national, and global levels were identified on the practice side. Given the initial validation and support of the HRD Cube and of the components described within theory, research, and practice sides, within these 16 articles published in AHRD-sponsored journals, at least 18 prospective paradigms of HRD were identified.