<p>Contemporary psychological and social science research has produced influential models of well-being, yet the cultural assumptions underlying these models are often left implicit. This article argues that widely used well-being constructs, although frequently presented as universal, are largely organized around an individualistic and independent construal of selfhood. It provides a systematic synthesis showing that core themes recurring across prominent contemporary models, such as autonomy and personal sense of purpose, and the ways in which these themes are defined, align closely with independent personhood and its characteristic ideals of authentic self-actualization. As a result, these indicators do not generalize straightforwardly to contexts in which personhood is more interdependent and collectivistic, and in which well-being is organized around harmonious coexistence, relational obligations, and role fulfillment. To address this limitation, the article proposes an integrative framework of well-being that distinguishes cultural ideals (i.e., what counts as well-being) from pathways (i.e., how well-being is pursued and realized). Within this framework, two ideal-pathway configurations are distinguished. One centers on authenticity as the ideal of well-being, pursued through self-expression. The other centers on harmony as the ideal of well-being, pursued through self-cultivation. The latter provides the basis for an alternative model of well-being that aligns more closely with interdependent and collectivistic forms of selfhood. This framework also helps explain why similar constructs, such as autonomy, relatedness, sense of purpose, and positive emotion, may carry different meanings and implications across cultural contexts. As such, it offers a foundation for more culturally inclusive theorizing, measurement, and interpretation of well-being in cross-cultural research.</p>