A new element added to the University of California at Los Angeles' student teacher program provided an opportunity for an exploratory study of the roles and responsibilities of college supervisors from an organizational perspective. A case study approach used data from interviews, self reports (in the form of a journal) from supervisors, and notes from a participant-observer during a two-week period. Doctoral and masters' degree students were hired as "clinical consultants" and were assigned to work with approximately 16 student teachers for one year. The clinical consultants were to act as counselors or as "clinical teachers," but they had no evaluative responsibilities. It was hoped that the clinical consultants could provide frequent feedback without the threat of evaluation for the student teachers and that the clinical consultants could receive training and practice in supervisory and research skills. Examination of data indicated that clinical consultants felt that credibility with student teachers and school-based cooperating teachers was critical. Credibility was enhanced by the lack of formal evaluative authority and the amount of field-based experience possessed by the consultants, as well as their use of three-way conferences. However, clinical consultants expressed disappointment with the conception of the research element of the program. Weak links were seen in the program's communication system between clinical consultants and college professors and between clinical consultants and program administrators. The usefulness of data provided by an organizational perspective in this case can indicate an alternative approach to supervisory programs. (FG)