(1) From Single-sided to Dyadic Design. Channel management research domains such as power-dependence relationships, conflict and so forth are inherently (at least) dyadic in nature, that is, involve two parties, and obtaining data from the perspectives of both sides of the channel dyad, and their divergence if any, permits a more comprehensive view and additional insights into the parties’ working relationship (e.g., Anderson and Weitz1992; Lusch and Brown 1996; Mohr and Sohi, 1995). Further, empirical investigations of channel management theories such as commitment-trust need to recognize the intrinsically dyadic nature of measurements of constructs such as trust (for an extensive review on theories in channel management research see Watson et al. 2015, in this issue). Frequently, however, methods that have been applied to test these theories gather and utilize data from only one side of the dyad. This potentially leads to the misunderstanding that the obtained measure of a dyadic construct like trust refers to only one of the channel partners, that is, pseudo-unilaterality or the error of attributing to the individual what is really a product of interactions between partners (Duncan et al. 1984; Kenny, Kashy, and Cook 2006).