  Decisions in organisations may be made either by a Central Authority (CA),
e.g., in a hierarchy, or by the agents in a decentralised way, e.g., in a
heterarchy. Since both kinds of organisations have their advantages (e.g.,
optimality for centralised organisations and reactivity for decentralised
ones), our goal is ultimately to understand when and how to use each of them.
Our previous work proposed a variant of the Multiple Travelling Salesmen
Problem, which we now call MTSPs . We use the subscript "s" to refer to
salesmen's selfishness when they minimise their individual route length. If, on
the contrary, they are assumed to be benevolent, we add subscript "b" and thus
the term MTSPb to refer to the traditional MTSP in which the salesmen minimise
the total route length. This article shows how to obtain such benevolent agents
by slightly modifying selfish agents. We can then compare organisations which
are (de-)centralised to a greater or lesser degree, which enables us to carry
out the allocation of cities in the MTSPb . The first experiment shows that the
relative efficiency (ranking) of the organisations differs between MTSPb and
MTSPs . Since reactivity fosters decentralisation, the second experiment
gradually reduces the time taken for it to impact this ranking. Both
experiments show that pure centralisation is either the best or the worst
option, and that the zone between the two situations is very narrow.
