Or....they could be gearing up for a doctrinal change.
After all, aren't there GB members who are way too young to really be classified as 'annointed'? Give it a few more years and the numbers going up will be a non-issue. At the least, it won't matter a single iota for the JWs who loyally swallow anything that comes from the gilded Tower.
They've already admitted that "evidently" the 1935 sealing of the anointed was completely baseless, and that seems to be primary reason for the big increase in partakers.
The other day I was around some JW family and they were talking about the number partaking. Someone guessed that it was down to 8000, and I piped up that it was ~14000 now. The room got quiet and the topic was changed to something else pretty quickly. This is definitely something that matters to some in the cult (especially those in the 30-60 yr old range since they were raised on the idea that we needed the 144k to die off)
The sooner they admit failure on this topic, the better it will be for them IMO. They need to get ahead of it because it's such an obvious failed doctrine that many have to see it and one uncorrected failed doctrine can sometimes be all it takes to cause doubts.
To go along with your point of elders trying to pry an hour out of publishers so they're not irregular/inactive-when i stopped turning in time, the elder I was supposed to turn my time to, just put down an hour for me without even asking! He is a friend so he was basically just covering for me
That's another great point. It's easy for an elder to feel OK about counting someone erroneously as a favor to that individual (without thought of how it impacts the stats) but it's not so easy for an elder to fail to count someone partaking and have any justification for it (aside from manipulation of the stats). In one case you're doing a personal favor for someone, in the other you're actually directly disrespecting someone (possibly someone you know). This will make it much more likely for the average, relatively conscientious elder to pad the publisher stats while they'd refuse to adjust the partakers down.
Another thought - it also probably feels much less significant to add an hour for a few publishers in a congregation of 100 than it does to not count the 1 partaker.