The way in which we set our goals influence action style and in consequence flexibility in adaptation to every day changes and emotional well- being. We analyze two general strategies people use to set goals. In one, called an interval strategy, individuals are less discriminating and are willing to accept a large number of possible goals and as a consequence try to achieve many goals at a time. Hence, they are adapt well when there is a scarcity of attractive options, but if the environment is rich in possibilities, their strategy can force them to deal with an overwhelming amount of information and, as a result, to become ineffective. The other method of goal setting, called a point strategy, refers to people who are discriminating in their choices and typically reject a large number of options as not good enough, pay attention to details and try to achieve one goal at a time. They thrive in an environment where there are plenty of good options; however, when such options are few, they become frustrated and adapt poorly. The aim of the paper is to discuss differences in frequency of using interval vs point strategies as individual difference treated as complex internal mechanism being composed of transactional relationships with other traits like for example extraversion. The data described in the paper shows as predicted that interval introverts compared to extraverts revealed worse both subjective well-being (both on cognitive and emotional level) and adaptation to everyday changes.