In Rav Dov Schwartz' book on the history of Religious Zionism he notes that the movement faces a critical issue in defining itself. During the 20th century two rabbinic leaders towered over the ideology and did much to define it, the Rav, zt"l, and Rav Kook, ztk"l. From today's perspective their influences were seen as different from one another. The Rav's approach was strictly halachic, being faithful to his Brisker roots and his belief in the pre-eminence of halacha in all areas of Judaism. Rav Kook, on the other hand, is recalled from the mystical perspective he brought to Religious Zionism which is quite different. The followers of Rav seek to develop Religious Zionism along practical, halachic lines while the students of Rav Kook see things in a more messianic fashion. The differences make it difficult to find common ground between the two factions.
But it seems to me that this doesn't necessarily have to be so. For one thing we must remember that in addition to being a pre-eminent mekubal Rav Kook was also a major posek. Yes he wrote a great deal in the mystical fashion but he also appreciated good halachic methodology just like the Rav. The gap between the two authorities isn't as great as one might think.
What's more, recall that Rav Kook himself was a special synthesis of the two pre-eminent traditions in the Torah-observant community of his time, the Yeshivish and the Chasidic branches. In his writings one can find evidence of his efforts to unite the two disparate philosophies and show that together they form one comprehensive and complete vision of Judaism. As the Final Redemption draws closer it's important to encourage efforts like this so that what has become a fragmented faith with all sorts of different traditions finds an inner unity.
Why is this important? On both sides of centrist Torah observance there are troubles brewing. On the left side there is the movement that wants to bring secular liberal ethics into Judaism but still call itself Orthodox. On the right the Chareidi world has become a self-righteous ethnic group more concerned with preserving itself than properly observing the Torah it claims to be the defender of. Only with strong positions in both halacha and kabalah can centrist Orthodoxy, Navonim if you will, stand as viable alternatives to both.
For all those Chareidim who are fed up with the narishkeit their leadership is serving them there is little perceived alternative. It's either the Oreo cookie outfit or complete secuarlism. Centrist Orthodoxy, with its current emphasis on academic approaches to Judaism combined with a perception that it is "Orthodoxy-lite" does not seem to them to be a serious alternative. As a result many bright and committed individuals who might find a home in a religious rigorous but moe rational Judaism are lost to Torah observance. Centrist Orthodoxy could fill this gap if it were to know how much deep halachic commitment and mystical awareness are part of its heritage.
Similarly on the left such stands could finally define what is acceptable according to a rationalist mesorah and what is simply playing "pick a posek" Judaism. This can only occur if centrist Orthodoxy demands firm loyalty of its followers to the proper halachic methodology.
It therefore seems to me that what is important for centrist Orthodoxy, both the MO and DL communities, is to unify around a greater commitment to learning the works of the Rav and Rav Kook and building a community around their values and traditions. In this way an amorphous group can form a strong alternative.