Lance Armstrong Foundation Case Study

The LIVESTRONG Foundation, formerly known as the Lance Armstrong Foundation, founded by Lance Armstrong, seven-time Tour de France winner and metastatic testicular cancer survivor, helps people living with cancer to connect with the services they need and advocates for cancer research across the globe (Korth, 2005). I chose to write about this foundation because of my own cancer diagnosis in 2010. Having received a copy of LIVESTRONG Guidebook Planner And Journal from a friend as a gift upon my diagnosis, I found its guidance and resources an invaluable source of encouragement throughout my cancer journey. However, despite the immeasurable good that the foundation has done in the cancer community, the issue of integrity in its leadership was most definitely called into question with the allegations and subsequent admission of guilt by its founder, Lance Armstrong, in regard to performance doping. While Armstrong withdrew from leadership, even prior to his public admission, the foundation has continued to suffer

both financial and reputational consequences for his personal lack of integrity (Donovan, 2013). LIVESTRONG was founded on hope…but is there hope for an organization whose founder is corrupt?
According to the LIVESTRONG Foundation website, the organization provides a myriad of services, ranging from research to community programs (LIVESTRONG, 2016). They offer direct services, such as informational brochures for survivors and organizations in multiple languages, geared toward different ethnicities, sexual orientations, and age groups; resources, including their guidebooks, survivor apps, and online tools; as well as a fertility program for survivors whose fertility is affected by their cancer diagnosis. They offer community programs, including partnerships with YMCAs across the U.S., to promote health and fitness for survivors; schools, to educate kids about cancer, in a child-appropriate manner; as well as the creation of The Young Adult Cancer Alliance, to address the specific needs of patients in that age group. They also advocate for change through research, by conducting surveys, lobbying for policy change, and instituting campaigns to educate the public.
Despite the organization’s leader’s fall from glory, the personal values of Lance Armstrong demonstrated at its inception continue to live on in its expression in the cancer community.

When he was diagnosed in 1996, his access to resources and guidance for navigating the medical, physical, and emotional tolls he would face on his journey was limited. Information existed, but it took effort, at a trying time, to find the help that he needed (MedlinePlus, 2006). With the support of his mother, close friends, and nurse, he was able to research, get a second opinion, and find the hope to keep going. It is that hope that motivated him to start the Lance Armstrong Foundation, and to, in the words of his doctor, Dr. Craig Nichols, “continue to fulfill the obligation of the cured by leading a grassroots movement to reduce incidence, increase survival and offer each person with cancer the opportunity to live their life on their own terms” (MedlinePlus,

2006).
While the initial founding of the organization seems to point to leadership integrity, its founder’s later proven corruption has adversely affected its reputation. In Chapter 2 of Introduction to Leadership: Concepts and Practice, integrity is described as describes integrity as follows:
Integrity characterizes leaders who possess the qualities of honesty and trustworthiness. People who adhere to a strong set of principles and take responsibility for their actions are exhibiting integrity. Leaders with integrity inspire confidence in others because they can be trusted to do what they say they are going to do. They are loyal, dependable, and transparent. Basically, integrity makes a leader believable and worthy of our trust. (Norton, p. 22)
It can be argued that Armstrong did the right thing in withdrawing from leadership; however, knowing now what we didn’t then, that he was lying all those years that he was denying guilt while in leadership, one must ask the question, “Was that true integrity ever really there?” It is my opinion that it wasn’t. The motivation for founding the organization may have been honorable but the founder, personally, was not. True leadership integrity would have been to do what is right from the start—ideally to have not engaged in corrupt behavior at all—or to have admitted wrongdoing at the first opportunity.
I think the best that can be said, in regard to LIVESTRONG’s far-reaching effect on Armstrong’s image, is that the fact that its creation on honorable principles may, to some extent, be his one redeeming quality. It cannot be denied that there must be some good, respectable substance in a person whose mission is to improve cancer survivorship, especially having been a survivor himself. There is no personal, long-term gain from such a feat, at least in this particular case, having discontinued his association with the foundation. I do think, for those of us who have benefited from the services provided through LIVESTRONG, we will always appreciate that initial contribution and may, perhaps, extend just a little more grace to Armstrong than others.
In the case of Lance Armstrong, the integrity of LIVESTRONG Foundation itself continues, even in small part, to benefit his personal image. Unfortunately, however, the demonstrated lack of personal integrity on his part has had far-reaching impact on the image of the foundation. LIVESTRONG continues to do good in the world and holds its own as an organization, but it will forever be associated with the name of a corrupt man (Marketwired, 2013).
I am so grateful to Lance Armstrong for founding LIVESTRONG, as it has contributed in such a positive way to my recovery. It is my hope, that with continued strong leadership and the distance that will continue to widen as time goes on, the foundation will one day be known completely in its own right for bringing about needed change in cancer research and services and improving quality of life for cancer survivors. There is still hope for LIVESTRONG to prove its own integrity, if not for Armstrong himself.