It sounds like you haven't actually read or understood The Innovator's Dilemma. TID isn't about companies growing too large and making obviously idiotic mistakes - it's hardly worth a book to point out that that might not be the best way to do things.
The point of TID is that in certain situations a company can make all the right decisions and still end up losing in the long run to worse products.
An industry that's being disrupted is one with higher-end customers served by successful businesses with expensive, high-margin, high-quality products, and less demanding customers being served by businesses with cheaper, lower-margin, inferior products, where the product quality of both segments grows at a faster rate than what the market demands. When the worse product becomes good enough for a large enough segment of the market, the industry swings - disruption.
The "Innovator's Dilemma" is that at any given time prior to the disruption, the right decision for the successful high-end company appears to be to not enter the lower end of the market, because the same investment applied to the current business will yield continued higher return.
Nokia doesn't have an innovator's dilemma here, they have a shitty product that nobody wants.