Then there is a case of everyone reading about agile and all it's ilk without understanding it completely. Everyone wants a "daily stand up" update meeting for every "project" out there. Then if there are issues, you need a separate "issue discussion meeting". Then there has to be "team meeting" to discuss what is going on in the team. The list goes on and on.
I also find that many a times, daily stand ups instead of being short, sweet 30 seconds update are just meandering stories trying to give color to a rather dull and boring day of work.
In my experience, surprisingly it wasn't a bank which had more meetings but a pure play IT product company. We were a team of consultants working on different projects so we had -
monthly team planning meeting,
daily status meeting,
executive action committee meeting,
weekly specific project status meeting,
daily status with the manager,
weekly status with manager's manager,
monthly status with manager's manager's manager (yes two times removed),
couple of "issue" meetings.
Average 1 hour meeting every day with at least 2 hours of prep required. So 3 hours everyday was gone just like that.
I am pretty sure it there metric for success, how many meetings they have a day.
This can even happen across departments, for example, when HR has a mandatory meeting for this or that, HR's budget should be charged for the time of the attendees, and the money distributed to their departments. The may be worth the cost, but it should be justified as a budget request.
Suppose HR asks the software development team to come by and write them some new payroll software. HR would be charged for that time. Why should it be any different when the software dev team is asked to attend a meeting in order to satisfy any other goal of HR?