I agree, the problem (and the solution) lies with the people who are the interface between makers and managers. The job description for these people varies but

I agree, the problem (and the solution) lies with the people who are the interface between makers and managers. The job description for these people varies but you know who they are - project leader type people. Here's what we try to do: all meetings known to involve lots of people are all scheduled Thursdays. The people who only have to attend one meeting don't care, and the people who have to attend multiple ones just cross off Thursday from being a "real work" day. Yes okay, it's a cost, but at least it is only a 20% cost. "Emergency" meetings involving senior management (you all know why the sarcasm quotes are there): the interface person should take the hit. In my experience there is rarely a technical issue raised in a senior management context that cannot be adequeately fielded (!= implemented) by a good project lead. Actually, I regard this as one of the major contributions of the leader: take all the crap on so that your guys can be left alone to do their work. I realise this opens a whole different can of worms in discussing what kind of person should be a project leader. If you have a shop with people working mixed hours (ie when everybody is not on a 9-5 schedule) you should have "core hours" to allow for meetings anyway. This at least stops meetingitis from creeping throughout the day. IM is a bigger problem I agree, but not necessarily in this category as it is a maker-to-maker disruption source as well as manager-to-maker one.