Objective: The aim of the present study was to explore how user participation is practised in two courses at a local Learning and Mastery Centre with regard to the process of planning, implementation and evaluation of the courses and from these two cases to further discuss how user participation might be facilitated or hindered. Design: A descriptive embedded multiple-case study design with one main unit and three subunits of analysis was chosen. Setting: A local Learning and Mastery Centre in Norway. Method: The main unit of study was how user participation was practised at a local LMC in Norway. Data were collected by means of observations, interviews and documents. In the analysis, content analysis was used. Results: None of the courses were in line with the understanding of the concept of user participation in health promotion when participation was practised as "taking part" and not as "having an influence". The funding system for the courses probably influenced the opportunities for user participation. The evaluation system proved to be of limited value for improving the quality of forthcoming courses. Conclusion: Detailed and standardized guidelines like the Standard Method seemed not to be a guarantee of user participation. Guidelines such as the Standard Method might neglect the complexity of user participation, and could be a straitjacket for both professionals and users. They should include a requirement of documentation of "how" participation is ensured and practised in the specific context of each single course. (Contains 2 tables.)