My thoughts: It's fairly obvious now that "Bigger is Always Better" is wrong. It would have seemed more convincing 100 years ago. Bigger is sometimes better. Small-scale production has some advantages. (Do I need to state them? I'll leave it to the reader as an exercise.)
If Big Communism and Small Anarchism both have their uses in their contexts, some sort of dual-track economy is needed, two parallel ways of organising the means of production.
The eastern bloc had some small private enterprises throughout. The example i can remember is some furniture shops that turned out pieces that weren't practical for mass production. Without planned obsolescence and profit motive there's a lot of room for small shop production to handle bespoke items - furniture, clothing, shoes, some kinds of tools, various kitchen stuff. And then large scale mass production handles medication, heavy machinery, lots of other things. At a certain point you don't need the efficiency of highly integrated mass production as much. You can make shoes that will last for decades with proper care. Clothing can be made bespoke and both more durable and more repairable. You can ease back on efficiency bc you don't need to save every possible penny by cheaping out on materials and construction quality.
Leaning heavily on mass production to get everyone up to an appropriate standard of living makes sense when you're going through transitional socialism, but as things stabilize there's a lot of places where small shop manufacture and cottage industry become appealing.