Three criticisms of the individualism-collectivism dichotomy are explicated. The dichotomy leads one to overlook values that inherently serve both individual and collective interests (e.g., wisdom), it ignores values that foster the goals of collectivities other than the ingroup (e.g., universal values, such as social justice), and it promotes the mistaken assumption that individualistic and collective values each form coherent syndromes that are in polar opposition. These problems are illustrated by applying a more fine-tuned analysis of ten types of values postulated to be present in all cultures (Schwartz, 1987) to data from four empirical studies. This analysis reveals meaningful group differences that are obscured by the individualism-collectivism dichotomy. As an impetus to future research, hypotheses are offered about the types of values likely to differ in importance between societies with a more collectivist (communal) social structure and those with a more individualistic (contractual) structure.