Not sure if this is "unorthodox" but I favor a transitional "state" that's a mixture of cohesion and autonomy, focused on most planning happening at the municipal level, but with higher level planning for things that warrant it. So, layers of decision making, likely at the workplace, local, national, and maybe international level, with the addition of special planning councils to represent specific marginalized groups. I think strict centralization is inefficient in terms of serving the needs of local populations, and doesn't allow for the creation and development of genuinely socialist (directly democratic) economic and social structures.

At the same time, a total lack of centralization would be crippling for managing large scale problems, such as collective security, management of key industries and resources, and climate change. You really would need the right combination of both, in a way that allows planning to happen at the layer or layers where a specific problem is best handled. I also think market socialism for consumer goods would be useful initially for building these planning layers (represented as ownership layers under market socialism) to ensure a relatively smooth transition that causes the least amount on unnecessary chaos/harm.

I also think that, given the threat posed by climate change, mitigating GHG emissions and tackling problems associated with climate change should take top priority, and any strategy or transition plan needs to incorporate those issues.