Ignorance of user factors can be seen as one of the nontechnical issues contributing to expert system failure. An expert advisory system is built for nonexpert users; the users' acceptance is a very important factor for its successful implementation. If an expert advisory system satisfactorily represents the expertise in the domain, there still remains the question: "Will the end-users use the system?" This paper aims to address users' issues by analysing their reactions towards an expert advisory system called ADGAME, developed to help its users make better decisions in playing a competitive business game. Two experiments with ADGAME have been carried out. The research results show that, when the use of the expert advisory system is optional, there is considerable reluctance to use it, particularly amongst the "worst" potential users. Users also doubt the potential benefits in terms of improved learning and confidence in decisions made. Strangely, the one positive expectation that users had, that the system would save them time, proved not to be the case in practice; ADGAME appears to improve the users' effectiveness rather than their efficiency.