Government performance continues to be improved by using various tools wisely. Today there are four main tools: privatization, outsourcing, public-private partnership and e-government. Indeed, not all tools are effective for improving government performance in terms of the peculiarities of the public sector. If an instrument seriously weakened the distinctiveness of the public sector, it would be considered an ineffective instrument. And “seriously weakened” means that an instrument makes public sector reorganization difficult because it is unable to meet its main archetypal principles. Three major archetypal principles will be considered, including the complexity of responsibility, difficulties in measuring output, and public value orientation. Therefore, if a tool can maintain these principles, it would be an effective tool. Before evaluating four tools, I would like to briefly define them. First, privatization is a tool that involves a permanent transfer from the government to the private sector as a whole. In general, privatization means that there are sales of assets by the government. And the decision to privatize has been set since it was completed. As Van R. & Paul (2007, p.233) make clear, these organizations continue to manage public services previously provided by the government. Second, contracting out means that the government shifts the operation to the private sector or another government agency (Van R. & Paul (2007, p.233) Paolo, p.234). Compared to the internal offer, only the suppliers change, while the other conditions remain the same. Contractors can rely on government funding and are required to follow the ideas of public decision makers in order to preserve public values. Contracting out is also a form of privatization… middle of paper… manufacturing seriously undermines the distinctive nature of the public sector. Sometimes the simplicity of measuring output presents a problem for those focused on results. And the result always refers to profit. Therefore, outsourcing is ineffective because, step by step, it easily adapted to the characteristics of the private sector and made it difficult to reorganize the public sector. As for privatization, it completely violates the archetypal principles of the public sector as it contains clear accountability, simplicity in measuring production and private value orientation. This is why privatization can be considered a tool that seriously weakens the distinctive nature of the public sector. Ultimately, after considering the distinctive nature of the public sector, only public-private partnership and e-government are more effective in improving government performance..