A variety of assessments have been developed to evaluate and, ultimately, enhance the resilience of water resource systems. This is no mean task given that such systems face a wide range of potential stresses including acute events such as floods or sabotage to longer term pressures exerted by growing populations and economies. The challenge is exacerbated by the fact that the resilience theory undergirding such assessments remains unsettled. This paper examines two resilience methodologies: 1) Risk Analysis and Management for Critical Asset Protection (RAMCAP) and 2) Climate Risk Informed Decision Analysis (CRIDA). While some of the stresses enumerated in RAMCAP can be considered chronic or long term in nature, the approach is, arguably, oriented to more proximal natural and anthropogenic pressures on water systems. CRIDA, on the other hand, was designed to prepare water resource managers for the challenges associated with climate change including increased volatility and uncertainty regarding water supply. These two assessments are compared against the literature that identify absorption, adaptation, and recovery as measurable resilience properties. Additionally, the theoretical foundations of each tool are examined regarding stakeholder identification and temporal horizon. The authors consider how these approaches might be combined to create a more theoretically robust and operationally wieldy approach to resilience assessment and enhancement. In so doing, the contribution that systems thinking can make to effective water resource management is highlighted. The paper concludes with a brief discussion of two possible lines of future research.