Popular press is replete with articles suggesting that one of the major reasons for the collapse of several manufacturing organizations is their lack in executing relational exchanges with their business partners such as their distributors. These firms are constantly falling a prey to dysfunctional micromanagement techniques, which facilitate quick sales growth, but, never-the-less, at the expense of ultimate damage to the firm. The basic premise is that these manufacturers have not accepted the belief that buried in these set of relational exchanges are the sociopolitical processes of sources of power, dependence, and conflict, whose interplay need to be understood from both parties’ perspective. These manufacturers eventually become insensitive to market demand by maintaining their inflexible, silo mentality and repudiating the idea of balancing these internal sociopolitical processes towards an enduring, committed relationship.Using distributor literature, a case study, and an Insider Accounts approach to survey a foreign equipment manufacturer and three of its U.S. distributors, from the manufacturer’s perspective, high dependency resulted in low manufacture’s conflict. High distributor’s non-coercive power led to low manufacturer’s conflict. High coercive powered was positively associated with manufacturer’s conflict. From the distributor’s perspective these associations were reversed. Managerial implications are suggested.