Le Maistre is sceptical about the motives and merits of the campaign, saying: "Quigley was a familiar figure to Light Reading during his time at Alcatel, and many believe Alcatel-Lucent would have got off to a better start if he had been named as CEO'¦He always struck this reporter as someone who would kick the rear end of anyone he found engaging in corrupt practices, especially within his own company, and not a person who would turn a blind eye or sanction such behaviour.
"It's just possible that Quigley is currently being placed under pressure because he is at the helm of a politically contentious and expensive national project, and not because anyone actually believes he did anything wrong."
Comments on the blog neatly summarise the opposing views on the matter: One writes: "I worked for Alcatel during those years. The levels of management was insulating to the CEO. You had directors, reporting to assistant vice presidents, reporting to regional vice presidents, who reported to senior vice presidents, [who] reported to Quigley.
"I know Mike personally and I know he would have not sanctioned unethical behaviour. He was running a multibillion dollar organisation. He did not track down to the million or two, he relied on his staff."
Another believes that, as the man in charge, regardless of bureaucratic complexity the buck stopped with Quigley.
You can read more stories on telecommunications in our newsletter ExchangeDaily, click here to sign up for a free trial...