Enriching the Visitor Experience, Part Two of Three
– By Stacey Ludlum, director of zoo and aquarium planning and design
Below is the second of three installments of a recent research report. “Enriching the Visitor Experience: PGAV Destinations and Environmental Design” clearly defines and gives examples of what enrichment is today; how exceptionally well-designed enrichment can greatly benefit the visitor experience; and why enrichment isn’t a luxury in zoo design, but rather an essential starting point. Part one can be found here; and if you’d like more, please visit Designing Zoos – one of the most-read zoo blogs in the industry.
Enrichment and the Visitor Experience
While designers are concerned about all aspects of a zoo project from the layout of a holding building to the design of a rock edged pool, our primary focus is the overall visitor experience. Everything affects a visitor’s perception of a zoo experience, from the exhibit itself to zoo guest services to visitors’ own expectations and perceptions garnered from previous zoo experiences (Seidensticker and Doherty, 1996). The designer’s role is to control as much of the experience as possible, and therefore the success of the overall visitor experience, from our point of view, comes down directly to the exhibit itself.
Designing an exhibit is quite possibly one of the most complex challenges a designer can face. Still, from the guest point-of-view, a successful exhibit experience is fairly straightforward and is based on two specific elements: the exhibit look and feel, and the perception of animal health and happiness. Oftentimes, guests assess animal health and happiness based simply on animal activity. In fact, Seidensticker and Doherty have gone so far as to suggest that in order to create a successful exhibit, we must ask ourselves two simple questions: Can the guest see the animal, and are they engaged in natural behavior (188)? As we know, providing enrichment will increase activity thus increasing overall guest satisfaction (Bitgood, Patterson and Benefield, 1986).
This brings us back to the critical importance of environmental enrichment in the design process. As we all know, many times keeper-initiated enrichment is not included when designing an exhibit; and because of that, does not get considered in the exhibit budget. Alternatively, enrichment budgets are created; but without outspoken proponents in the planning meetings, oftentimes they will suffer from final budgetary cutbacks. “Enrichment dollars are being traded for rockwork, landscaping or holding areas, which are more easily defined and seemingly more ‘necessary’ (Kemper, 2003).”
For these reasons, we must work collaboratively as a design team to ensure enrichment programs are developed successfully. Both designers and zoo professionals bring expertise to the table. Individually, we are able to design, but by working together, we’re increasing efficiency, opportunity for innovation, and leadership buy-in. As designers, we understand that the best designs are not created in a vacuum. “An individual designer, no matter how well informed, cannot match the collective knowledge and creative capacity of a diversified and motivated group (Coe, 1993).”
Beyond the design, successful enrichment must be implementable and utilized. Implementation in the zoo relies almost solely on the planning team’s understanding of the zoo’s philosophical approach to enrichment and the extent to which funds and staffing will be allocated to the long-term program at the exhibit. As Kemper wrote, “without this foundation, success is uncertain even if the enrichment components are physically built into the project (2003).” Working together to fully define the long-term strategy for planned utilization leads to the most effectively designed enrichment.
Long-term success of enrichment programs is simple: create a strong, well-conceived and client-specific design and program, and see that it is used. To do so, we must all work together as a cohesive team from kick-off through implementation.
