Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for standing by. Welcome to the 3M second quarter earnings conference call. During the presentation, all participants will be in the listen-only mode. Afterwards, we will conduct a question and answer session. At that time, if you have a question, please press the 1 followed by the 4 on your telephone keypad. It is recommended that you use a landline phone if you are going to register for a question. As a reminder, this conference is being recorded Tuesday, July 25, 2017. I would now like to turn the call over to Bruce Jermeland, Director of Investor Relations at 3M.
Thank you, and good morning, everyone. Welcome to our second quarter 2017 business review. On the call today are Inge Thulin, 3M's Chairman, President, and CEO, and Nick Gangestad, our Chief Financial Officer. Each will make some formal comments, and then we will take your questions. Please note that today's earnings release and slide presentation accompanying this call are posted on our investor relations website at 3m.com under the heading Quarterly Earnings. Before we begin, let me remind you of the dates for our future investor events. Please turn to slide two. First, starting with earnings. Our Q3 earnings conference call will be held on October 24. The Q4 call will be next year on January 25. And lastly, our 2018 outlook meeting will take place on December 12. Please mark your calendars. Please take a moment to read the forward-looking statement on slide three.
During today's conference call, we will make certain predictive statements that reflect our current views about 3M's future performance and financial results. These statements are based on certain assumptions and expectations of future events that are subject to risks and uncertainties. Item 1A of our most recent Form 10-K lists some of the most important risk factors that could cause actual results to differ from our predictions. Please turn to slide four, and I will hand the call off to Inge.
Thank you, Bruce. Good morning, everyone, and thank you for joining us. For 3M, the second quarter was marked by strong organic growth of 4%, with positive growth across all five business groups. At the same time, we took a number of actions to better position our enterprise for success in both the short and long term. This includes accelerated strategic investments to support growth and strengthening our portfolio along with M&A. I will now take you through some of the numbers. As I mentioned, organic growth across the company was 4%, led by Electronics and Energy at 8%. Industrial and Safety and Graphics continued to grow well, posting organic growth of 4% and 3% respectively. Healthcare also grew 3%, and it was good to see our Consumer business turn positive with 1% organic growth. Company-wide total sales in U.S. dollars were $7.8 billion, up 2% year-on-year.
We delivered earnings of $2.58 per share, along with margins of 28%. Note that these results include impacts from both M&A and strategic investments, which Nick will cover in more detail. Excluding those impacts, core operating margins remain strong at more than 24%. Turning to free cash flow, we posted a good conversion rate of 85% in the second quarter. Our healthy cash flow enabled us to invest in the enterprise while also returning significant cash to our shareholders. In the second quarter, we returned $1.2 billion to our shareholders through dividends and share repurchases. That concludes my opening remarks, and I will now turn the call over to Nick, who will take us through more of the numbers. Nick?
Thanks, Inge, and good morning, everyone. I'll start on slide five. As Inge mentioned, GAAP earnings for the quarter were $2.58 per share. Since we had several moving parts to this quarter, I thought I would take a moment to cover each item to make our underlying second quarter performance as clear as possible. As Inge mentioned, we continue to execute our plans in Q2 to strengthen the company for the future. During the quarter, we made incremental strategic investments of $178 million. $39 million was growth-related, and $139 million related to portfolio and footprint actions. For the second half of the year, we anticipate another $0.20 to $0.25 per share impact from incremental strategic investments, largely footprint related. These actions drive greater productivity from our manufacturing and supply chain base and will improve our service to our customers.
Looking ahead, we expect footprint actions to be, at a minimum, an expense of $0.10 per share in 2018. This expectation includes benefits from actions implemented in 2017. In addition, we had divestiture-related activity in the quarter, which added $0.57 to GAAP earnings per share, of which $0.54 relates to the identity management business. Taking into account these items, underlying earnings were $2.25 per share, up 8.2% year-on-year. Please turn to Slide 6 for a recap of our quarterly sales performance. We posted good organic growth in the quarter of 3.5%, with volumes up a solid 3.8%. Selling prices were down 30 basis points year-on-year due to a couple of factors. Strong volume growth in electronics had a negative impact on price, and we saw less price growth in Latin America as currencies were more stable versus the US dollar.
We continued to actively manage the portfolio in Q2 and divested some non-strategic businesses, which reduced sales by 100 basis points. Foreign currency translation decreased sales by another 60 basis points. All in, second quarter sales in US dollars increased 1.9% versus last year. In the U.S., organic growth was 1.9%, led by a mid-single-digit increase in industrial. Our healthcare and Safety and Graphics businesses delivered low double-digit growth in the quarter. The consumer business was down 1% organically in the U.S. in Q2, impacted by continued channel adjustments in the office market. Asia Pacific led the company with organic growth of 10% in Q2. All business groups within APAC posted strong growth in the quarter, including a double-digit increase in Electronics and Energy, and high single-digit growth in each of our other four business groups. Organic growth was 17% in China, Hong Kong, and 8% in Japan.
Excluding our electronics-related businesses, China, Hong Kong grew 12%, and Japan was up 4%. Moving to EMEA, organic growth declined 2% in Q2 with a similar result in West Europe. This area experienced fewer billing days versus last year due to the timing of the Easter holiday. Through the first half of the year, EMEA grew 1% organically, led by our Safety and Graphics and industrial businesses. Q2 organic growth in Latin America, Canada was 4%, with all businesses posting positive growth. Healthcare led the way up high single digits and consumer grew mid single digits. At a country level, Mexico continued to deliver strong organic growth at 8%. Brazil was up 6%, while Canada grew 3%. We continue to generate broad-based growth across the globe, giving us confidence in our full-year expectations, which Inge will discuss later. Please turn to Slide 7 for the second quarter P&L highlights.
Company-wide second quarter sales were $7.8 billion, with net income of $1.6 billion, up 23%. On a GAAP basis, second quarter operating margins were 28% or 24.3% year-over-year, excluding the previously mentioned impact from incremental strategic investments and divestitures. Let's take a closer look at the various components of our margin performance in the second quarter. Gains from organic volume growth and productivity contributed 60 basis points to operating margins. Lower raw material costs, net of selling price changes, added another 10 basis points. Foreign currency, net of hedge gains, brought margins down 50 basis points in the quarter, while higher year-on-year pension and OPEB expense decreased margins by 30 basis points. Incremental strategic investments reduced margins by 2.3 percentage points, and divestiture-related activity benefited margins by 6 percentage points. Let's now turn to Slide 8 for a closer look at earnings per share.
Second quarter GAAP earnings were $2.58 per share, including a net earnings benefit of $0.33 per share from the combined impact of gains on divestitures, which were partially offset by incremental strategic investments and non-repeating lost operating earnings. Excluding these items, our operating EPS was $2.25, up 8.2% year-on-year. The combination of organic growth and productivity contributed $0.08 per share to Q2 earnings. Foreign currency, net of hedging, reduced pre-tax earnings by $0.05 a share. Our Q2 tax rate was 26% versus 29.6% in the prior year, which increased earnings by $0.12 per share. The lower tax rate was driven by favorable geographic profit mix, our supply chain centers of expertise, and ongoing strategic tax initiatives. For the first half of the year, our tax rate was 25%.
We now expect the full year tax rate to be in the range of 26%-27%, versus a prior range of 26%-27.5%. Lower shares outstanding and higher interest expense together had a net $0.02 positive impact to EPS. Please turn to Slide 9 for a look at cash flow. We continue to generate solid operating cash flow as a company, which allows us to consistently invest in the business and return cash to shareholders. Second quarter free cash flow was $1.3 billion, up $378 million year-on-year. Free cash flow conversion was 85% in the quarter, and for the full year, we now anticipate free cash flow conversion to be in the range of 95%-100%, versus 95%-105% previously. The adjustment to the high end of the range is primarily due to the gain on sale of identity management.
Second quarter capital expenditures were $302 million. For the full year, we continue to anticipate CapEx investments in the range of $1.3 billion to $1.5 billion. During the quarter, we paid $701 million in cash dividends to shareholders and also returned $494 million to shareholders through growth share repurchases. In the first half of the year, we repurchased $1.2 billion in stock and now expect full year repurchases to be in the range of $2 billion to $3.5 billion, versus $2.5 billion to $4.5 billion previously. Let's now review our performance by business group. Please turn to slide 10. Industrial, our largest business group, continued its strong growth, delivering second quarter sales of $2.7 billion, up 3.8% organically. Industrial's growth was once again broad-based across all geographic areas in nearly all businesses. Advanced materials led the way with low double-digit growth in the quarter.
The automotive and aerospace solutions business grew mid-single digits in the quarter, as we continue to outgrow the market. Our Heartland businesses within Industrial all posted positive organic growth in the quarter. Industrial adhesives and tapes grew mid-single digits, and abrasives and automotive aftermarket each grew low single digits. On a geographic basis, organic growth was led by Asia-Pacific and the U.S. Industrial delivered second quarter operating income of $523 million with an operating margin of 19.2%. Adjusting for incremental strategic investments, operating margins were 21.5%, down nearly 200 basis points year-on-year. Half of the decline was due to foreign currency, with the remainder from mix and select pricing actions to drive volume growth. Looking ahead, we expect operating leverage in the business to improve in the second half of the year. Please turn to slide 11.
Second quarter sales in Safety and Graphics were $1.5 billion, with organic growth of 3.2%. Organic growth was led by our personal safety business, which again delivered high single-digit growth in the quarter. We continue to experience strong demand for our personal safety solutions across the world, with particular strength in Asia-Pacific, up double digits, followed by high single-digit growth in the U.S. In transportation safety, we continue to take actions to improve the portfolio. In Q2, we finalized the sale of the identity management and tolling businesses and announced the exit of electronic monitoring. For almost 80 years, 3M has pioneered industry-leading solutions to improve road safety and mobility. We continue to focus on the rapidly changing trends in transportation safety and mobility, including the connected roadways of the future.
Finally, Q2 organic growth in our commercial solutions business was flat, while the roofing granules business declined, primarily due to tough year-on-year comps. Geographically, Safety and Graphics grew organically in all areas, led by a 9% increase in Asia-Pacific. Second quarter profits in Safety and Graphics more than doubled year-on-year to $852 million, boosted by divestiture gains. Adjusting for these items and strategic investments year-on-year, operating margins were 27.1%. Please turn to slide 12. Our healthcare business generated second quarter sales of $1.4 billion. Organic growth was 2.5% year-on-year. Organic growth was led by a double-digit increase in drug delivery systems, followed by food safety, which was up high single digits. Our medical consumables businesses, which represent the largest segment within healthcare, posted 3% organic growth in Q2. Health information systems was flat year-on-year and delivered sequential improvement.
Looking ahead, we expect organic growth to improve in this business throughout the balance of the year as our contract pipeline continues to build. Oral Care was flat in Q2, with the first half of the year up 2%. Geographically, healthcare was led by high single-digit organic growth in both Asia-Pacific and Latin America, Canada. The U.S. grew 3%, and EMEA declined mid-single digits. We saw notable strength in China, Hong Kong, and Latin America, which were both up double digits in the quarter. Healthcare's operating income was $412 million, and operating margins were 28.6%. Adjusting for strategic investments year-on-year, operating margins were 30.6%. Please turn to slide 13. Electronics and Energy continued to lead our company with second quarter organic growth of 8.4%, resulting in sales of $1.2 billion.
The electronic side of the business grew 15% organically as our team continued to drive increased penetration on many OEM platforms. For example, our Novec specialty fluids grew high teens as we continued to see strong demand for its many applications. Demand strengthened across most market segments in consumer electronics, and we continued to benefit from favorable year-on-year comps. Our energy-related businesses were down 3% organically, with electrical flat, while telecom declined. On a geographic basis, organic growth was led by a double-digit increase in Asia-Pacific, which is where our electronics business is concentrated. Latin America, Canada grew slightly, U.S. was flat, while EMEA declined. Second quarter operating income for Electronics and Energy was $301 million with operating margins of 24.8%. As you can see, Q2 was another strong quarter for our Electronics and Energy business. Please turn to slide 14.
Second quarter sales and consumer were $1.1 billion, with organic growth of 0.7%, which was an improvement versus recent quarters. We continued to see positive organic growth in three of our four consumer businesses, namely home improvement, home care, and consumer healthcare. As expected, our stationary and office supplies business was again impacted by channel inventory reductions in the U.S. office retail and wholesale channels. Although these growth headwinds were lower in Q2 versus Q1. We expect to see these channel adjustments continue, but to have less of an impact in the back half of the year. We are seeing a good return on accelerated investments in some of our key category-defining brands. For example, our Command damage-free mounting products posted strong double-digit growth, and we also delivered good growth in Scotch-Brite cleaning products.
Geographically, organic growth in consumer was led by Asia-Pacific and Latin America, Canada, both up high single digits. This growth was partially offset by declines in the U.S. and EMEA. Finally, operating income was $195 million, with an operating margin of 17.2%. Adjusting for strategic investments year-on-year, operating margins were 22.2%. Please turn to slide 15, and I will now turn the call back over to Inge. Inge?
Thank you, Nick. As I look upon the first six months of the year, I'm pleased with the performance from our global team. We are successfully executing the 3M playbook while delivering strong growth and premium returns. On the left-hand side of this chart, you see the first half numbers. Robust earnings of $4.74 per share, organic growth of 4%, margins of more than 25%, up 130 basis points year-on-year, or up 40 basis points excluding the impact of M&A and strategic investments, and a free cash flow conversion rate of 70%. Equally important, we were active in taking action to strengthen 3M today and into the future. As you heard Nick discuss, we accelerated strategic investments in the first half, which include an incremental $75 million to support growth in core platforms.
These growth investments will continue throughout the year, they will contribute 50 to 100 basis points of growth in 2017. We also invested another $239 million in the first half to optimize our portfolio and manufacturing footprint. This is part of the five-year plan we laid out in March of 2016 at our investor day in St. Paul, We are making good progress executing that plan. These investments are important to strengthen the long-term competitiveness of our enterprise. Beyond strategic investment, we also continue to make good progress on our three key levers. The first is portfolio management, In March, we announced the acquisition of Scott Safety, which should close in the second half of this year. This acquisition will complement organic growth and further improve our position in the fast-growing personal safety market. In the first half, we also finalized three divestitures and announced another one.
Ultimately, selling the businesses will allow us to focus on our biggest and best opportunities and create the greatest value for our shareholders. Investing in innovation is the second lever. In the first half, we invested $944 million in research and development, or 6% of sales. This investment support organic growth while enabling us to deliver premium margins and return on invested capital. The third lever is business transformation, which starts and ends with our customers. At our investor day last month in Neuss, Germany, many of you saw the good progress we are making with the rollout of the ERP system in West Europe. Our business transformation plan is on track, I remain confident going forward. In summary, our team delivered a strong first half performance. We're executing our strategies, building for the future, and posting a good financial performance.
As a result, today we are raising the bottom end of our full year guidance for both earnings per share and organic growth, which you will see on slide 16. With respect to EPS, we now anticipate earnings of $8.80-$9.05 per share, up 8%-11% versus last year, against the prior range of $8.70-$9.05. Organic growth is estimated to be 3%-5%, up from the previous range of 2%-5%. As you can see, we continue to expect strong results in terms of both return on invested capital and free cash flow conversion for the full year. That concludes our prepared remarks, With that, I thank you for your attention, We will now take your questions.
Ladies and gentlemen, if you would like to register a question using a landline phone, please press the one followed by the four on your telephone keypad. You will hear a three-tone prompt to acknowledge your request. If your question has been answered and you would like to withdraw your registration, please press the one followed by the three. If you're using a speakerphone, please lift your handset before entering your request. Please limit your participation to one question and one follow-up. One moment, please, while we compile a Q&A roster. Our first question comes from the line of Andrew Kaplowitz of Citi. Please proceed with your question.
Good morning, guys.
Good morning, Andrew.
Good morning.
Nick, can you give us more color on what's going on with your ability to price? You mentioned the electronics pricing impact in APAC, but U.S. pricing continues to drift down. You did preview price versus raws getting less positive as the year went on, and it did stay positive in the quarter. Could you talk about your confidence that it will stay positive as the year continues? The negative pricing you're seeing more a choice and a market share gain for you, or is it simply more competition?
Yeah, Andy, in the case of pricing both for the quarter and for the year, if I think about 3M's business model, where we take technology, use that to create value for the customers, that ultimately creates our fundamental pricing power. That hasn't changed. That remains strong. For the second quarter, we saw a price down 30 basis points, and as you mentioned, we saw it down approximately 40 basis points in the U.S. On a global basis, what we're seeing, Andy, is two main things that have changed from first quarter are strong growth in electronics, which was much more of a price down than the other businesses that we saw. That strong volume growth there contributed to more negative price growth in Asia Pacific.
In Latin America, where we often see price growth often driven by a weakening currencies against the U.S. dollar, we saw a much more stable currencies there versus the U.S. dollar. Some of the corresponding price growth we see didn't materialize. The core price growth, and this gets into what we saw in the United States. Core price growth, we traditionally see somewhere between 30 and 50 basis points of core price growth. In the U.S., we see ourselves now tracking to the low end of what we've been expecting for price growth. We expect it to be closer to flat for the total year in the U.S. We are taking, in some markets, selected price adjustments to gain market share to accelerate volume growth. Some examples are our industrial business and our consumer business.
Okay, Nick, that's helpful. Inge, can you give us a little more color on what's going on in your healthcare business? You've talked about seeing an acceleration of that business. Healthcare also seems like the biggest target for your growth investments that are supposed to boost growth in the segment this year, yet you did see some deceleration in the quarter. Obviously, the deceleration looks Oral Care-related. Maybe that's just Easter. Your growth investments, are they having their intended effect, and could you still see some acceleration of that business in the second half year?
Yes, we will see acceleration of that business in the second half. It is a very strong business for us. You're right, we have made the investment now for quite some time. In fact, in Q2, we peaked that investment moving forward. We see a couple of things happening for us. The accelerated investment for growth is now, in a way, hitting the peak for us, You will see some of the businesses really picking up in the second part of the year, We have some easier comparison as well. You comment on Oral Care, as you recall, all of us recall, we have a very strong first quarter, almost 5% growth. Second quarter was flat.
I think when you look upon that, there is, of course, an impact, as we talked about billing days and selling days in West Europe due to Easter specifically. I also think you saw in U.S., end user demand that was down in the second quarter due to the reduction of restorative procedures. I think if you take those together, the growth for Oral Care after the first two quarters is 2%. Clearly, we are continuing to grow, We take market share. I'm not overly concerned about that shift in between Q1 and Q2 for that business. Healthcare will do very well as we move ahead into the second part of the year. We're on plan, It looked good for us.
Okay. Thanks, Inge.
Our next question comes from the line of John Inch of Deutsche Bank. Please proceed with your question.
Thank you. Good morning, everyone.
Good morning, John.
Good morning, guys. I'd like to pick up on the price theme just for a second. I think you have to go back to 2008 to see net price negative. I guess I'm curious to know, are you cutting price because your products are too expensive or because competitors have cut price or the underlying markets are changing out from under you? Maybe a little more color as to kind of what's the context and nature of these adjustments. In theory, price cuts just don't happen on a one-time basis. There's a certain degree of perpetualness to it, right? Maybe you could help frame sort of the durational context in your minds.
Yeah. John, you know as well as I do, it's a competitive world. We're constantly working to, how can we gain the market share that we think our product should be having? In this kind of competitive world, we keep looking for where are there opportunities where price could have been a barrier for us taking market share. In a couple of businesses I mentioned, industrial and consumer, as well as electronics in Asia, we look for where there are those opportunities. Partly how I think about this, John, we're also through our investments to accelerate growth, as we're investing in more dollars to commercialize many of our existing product lines.
In some of those cases, we looked at where are there opportunities where our current price position could be a barrier to us reaching the maximum market share potential that we felt we could attain, and we're making those selected adjustments. I do think we are at probably the peak of the price declines that we've taken to do that. I don't see much further downward pressure from the momentum we've had, and if anything, I see the second half of the year with some uptick in that pricing.
Okay. If I read between what you're saying, it sounds like you're saying that as you're looking at sort of strategy in the future, you said, "Hey, certain product lines in these categories are going to face upward limits if we don't actually adjust prices lower." In other words, competitors weren't putting pressure on you, although maybe that happened subtly, but this is very much kind of 3M driving the strategic pricing. Is that fair?
Yeah, John, I think the fair way to characterize it is these are 3M decisions we're making, not responses we're making in the market. These are 3M-driven actions.
Okay. Understood. Then, Nick, just the decline in share re purchase for the year, kind of at the midpoint. What exactly are you signaling, if anything? Maybe you could remind us, what exactly is your dividend policy? Your stock's done incredibly well, but now your yield is bordering on below average. Is it a payout formula, or is it a yield function? Maybe you could just remind us again, please.
I'll talk broadly on returning cash to shareholders and then go into specifically what you're asking on the dividend and the share repurchases. You know, for us, John, returning cash to shareholders is a priority, and we do it both through dividends, and we do it through share repurchases. On the dividend front, we've reached a point where we think our dividend payout ratio is in the zone that we want it to be, and future increases in our dividend over time, we expect to be very similar to what we anticipate for earnings per share growth. In the coming years, we expect our dividend to grow in line with earnings over time. On the share repurchase front, that's more dynamic for us. You've probably heard me say this before, we have a twofold strategy there.
We do maintain a consistent presence in the market with a base level of repurchases, then we augment that with opportunistic buyback based on relative value. We continually assess the market valuation through our own analysis, comparing it to how the stock is trading. Over time, we found that to be a good risk-adjusted basis to be creating value. Now, lower purchases both for the quarter and for the year. We adjusted the full-year range down based on where we stand through the first half of the year. The market's been strong, we're exercising discipline, and we anticipate there will continue to be opportunities in the future to effectively deploy capital to maximize those returns. I would also add that our allocation of capital to share buybacks is also influenced by other demands on capital, such as M&A.
In other words, Nick, is the money you're going to save from share repo this year, is that sort of earmarked for something else, or is it kind of a wait and see then?
There's a bit of a wait and see on that, John, that we still plan to be putting significant capital into share repurchases. We have announced our planned acquisition of Scott Safety, which we anticipate to happen in the second half of the year. As you know, this type of market, there can be dynamics. We are keeping our options open for the second half of the year.
Yes, we like to have the flexibility, John, as we move ahead.
Yeah, absolutely. Makes sense. Thank you very much.
Thank you.
Our next question comes from the line of Robert McCarthy of Stifel. Please proceed with your question.
Yeah. In terms of the strategic investments, you have spoken a lot about on the call, and it's been consistent with kind of your contemplation through the first half of the year. Could you talk about specifically what kind of returns you're looking for on these investments, whether paybacks or ROI, and talk about are the nature of the investments truly growth investments or there's some restructuring involved as well in certain areas where perhaps demand is not what you're thinking it is?
Rob, you can think of our growth investments this year in two big components. One is our investments in growth, and that's the minority part of the investment, and it's aligned with what we originally guided back in December about an incremental $100 million that we anticipate to be spending in growth investments. It's a number of core product platforms we have that we're investing in commercialization dollars. In some cases it can be advertising, merchandising. In some cases it can be people involved in adding people in the actual selling process of our products. We anticipate that that will add 50 to 100 basis points to our growth for the total year. That's factored into our guidance now. Through the first half of the year, Rob, we're seeing our growth, and our expenditures on that front tracking very much in line.
That's the minority of our total strategic investments. The more significant thing on strategic investments for us in 2017 is the actions we're taking in optimizing our manufacturing supply chain footprint. That aligns with what we shared in March of 2016 when we laid out our five-year plan. In optimizing our footprint and our manufacturing base, we anticipated over a period of the next few years, we'd be investing between $500 million and $600 million, in some cases closing manufacturing sites and shifting manufacturing and expanding manufacturing in our most more efficient sites, ultimately to reduce our total manufacturing footprint, to improve efficiency and to improve our ability to service our customers. Most of what you're seeing under strategic investments fits under that strategy. We took a number of actions in the second quarter.
In terms of the return, the way we've quantified that, there's a couple ways I can quantify that for you, Rob. One is, by 2020, we anticipate that this will increase our operating income annually between $125 million and $175 million. That's one way for you to think of it. Another way is that we anticipate that this will be greater than a 30% return on investment for the investment that we're taking on this footprint optimization.
That's very thorough. Thank you. I guess the other question in the context of some of these pricing discussions that John and Andy alluded to, you'll find that investors in the space generally have a lot of PTSD when it comes to Amazon, with respect to the distribution disruption that's going on across the board. We see price concessions or a new pricing regime of sorts in consumer industrial businesses. Can you talk about are you rethinking distribution and the sensitivity to price or going direct or anything along those lines that would kind of orient why you think this is a forward-thinking 3M movement, that you're kind of looking at things and saying, "Maybe the business is changing or maybe the environment's changing.
We're going to get ahead of this and have more concessions on price or maybe do value engineering around new products to drive better growth. Could you just comment on that?
Yeah, this is Inge. Let us first of all talk about what is going on in the marketplace, and as you talked about initially, consumer, if you like. What is going on in the retail and consumer space? When you lead a business in totality, it's not price that you initially think about. You think about structure, and if you take our consumer business, in order to adjust our structure for the future, we started that back in 2012. 2012 was when we start to look upon our consumer business in terms of how do we operate, and how do we think the future will look like, and how can we become more relevant to our customers? That was the question. At that time, we had nine divisions in consumer. Today, we have four. You think about that in terms of evolution of the portfolio.
We started back very early to adjust for a future that eventually could look different. As you heard in the result today, very slight difference in it. In terms of consolidation for us, as we have three or four business divisions growing, it's basically in the office supply that still consolidation is going on. We have not seen any, either in consumer or in industrial, any differences relative to the power for us to drive growth. We often a price leader, and we are executing those plans. We don't see differences there. If you think about 3M, generally speaking, as a business, 70% of our business is either design or spec'd in or regulated. If you think about it from that perspective, it's a smaller portion of 3M that eventually could be impacted. We will adjust relative to that.
We are not thinking of going on price because that's not our business model. Our business model is to introduce a product that is adding value, either through different design or improved productivity, and then we are driving price based on that. Your question is on price, and I would say we are adjusting our business models as we move forward. Often that is, for us, the structure in commercialization, and it's also footprint, right? You saw the investment we are doing here in the first question relative to return on that. $5 million-$600 million with an annual return by 2020 of in between $125 million-$175 million. Those are important things for us to improve our competitiveness as we move forward.
Thanks for your time.
Thank you.
Our next question comes from the line of Nigel Coe of Morgan Stanley. Please proceed with your question.
Thanks.
Hey, Nigel.
I hate to kind of return to the same pricing, but just something I've never heard 3M trying to drive volumes or market share gains through price. I'm wondering, are you taking here a decision to invest some of the raw material goodness, the deflation of raw materials into price and hence market share? Just maybe Nick, thinking about that $0.10, $0.15 of raw material deflation benefit in the plan, how does that look on a net basis versus price at this point?
For the raw materials, the $0.10 to $0.15 that we anticipated of benefits at the beginning of the year, there's been puts and takes as we go along on the raw material side. So far we're still seeing ourselves in that range of $0.10 to $0.15. I'd say the potential where in the last couple of years where we go past that number, I don't see that as a very high probability. I see us in this range, maybe tending a little towards the bottom end of that range, based on what we're seeing in the raw material markets today. On the pricing front, I don't know what to repeat, but other than there have been these isolated places where we've taken action.
In the second half of the year, we expect a more normal price growth for 3M, as we've put in plan some actions to be bringing price back to a more normal level that we've historically experienced in 3M. I don't see much changing on that front from our original guidance, Nigel.
Okay. That's fair. Just to clarify, when you say normal, you mean the 30 to 50 basis ex FX. Would that be the second half of the year, or is that more 2018? Maybe just clarify as well the comment you made on the investment spending, in 2018, you said $0.10. Is that $0.10 on top of the $0.05-$0.10 run rate or $0.10 total?
On the strategic investments around growth, when we started the year, we said that we expected that to be an incremental $0.10 expense, and we continue to expect it to be that incremental $0.10. We're not increasing that number any further. On the price growth, while I say to the more normal range, I do think it'll still be to the lower end on price growth, in the second half of the year. Approaching in the positive zone, not up to the whole 30 to 50 basis points that we normally are getting for core price growth.
That's very helpful. Thanks, Nick.
Our next question comes from the line of Steve Tusa of JP Morgan. Please proceed with your question.
Hey, guys. Good morning.
Morning, Steve.
When you think about the industrial business, I guess you can kind of throw Safety and Graphics in there as well, how much of that business currently goes through the proper industrial distributors? How has that trended relative to online and the Amazons of the world over the last, call it two years here, three years?
Yeah. I think if you
Rough term.
Yes. Yeah. Hey, this is Inge. If you think about you combine the two businesses, which is a good way to look upon it, I would say that, think about it like a 50/50 model, if you think on it globally. Some countries will have more distribution than others. If you think about the two businesses combined and how we go to market, I think it's 50/50, generally speaking. Again, if you take many businesses in both industrial and in Safety and Graphic, they are spec-in or design-in, or also regulated in a way. The push will maybe happen for some consumables that will go through e-business channels, if you like. We have not seen a big trend in that space as of yet.
Maybe it will come, I think then you have to think about how will that impact you relative to what you do with your end customers. We are prepared to move in that direction, and if you look upon our business in the second quarter, if you take the two businesses you're talking about, the increase relative to e-business was 9%, and they estimate it to be 14 for the second part of the way. You have to think about it also, that piece today, for us, is 2%-3% of our total business where we do e-business direct ourselves.
Got you.
many of our customers are, of course, finding the platforms themselves, it will not impact us by definition as we see it at this point in time on price levels.
When we think about what's going on in the world, going back to Rob's question around the higher level strategic type of stuff, Grainger obviously came out and made some headlines talking about cutting price to drive growth. They have a great franchise historically. You guys obviously have one of the greatest franchises ever, and you're talking about cutting price to drive growth. Is this just coincidence? Is this just the macro environment that we're in, or are these in some way linked to what's become a much more dynamic, competitive environment in the industrial or even consumer channels, if you want to throw consumer in there as well? Any relationship there at all? Has Grainger at all called you and said, "Hey, let's take some of the pain," because I know you guys go through them a bit.
This deflationary environment is just something new for all of us, I think, over the last couple of years.
I cannot comment on Grainger, of course, in business, generally speaking, that will be more dynamic as you move ahead, right? I think we see that specifically in the retail area at this point in time. I think different company will have different impacts, right? If you think about what we are all about relative to our portfolio, as I said, a lot of it is spec-in, design-in and regulated. By definition, to drive that in terms of price down, that's where you have to hold back to your technology platforms, to your brand equity, et cetera. I don't see a direct correlation as you talk about this quarter, to be honest. I will agree to, as we move ahead, that in all businesses, you're in healthcare or electronics or consumer or industrial, dynamics will happen, and we have to adjust to that.
That's what we're doing, by the way, right? When you see some of our investments in terms of strategic investment for the future is to make sure we are more competitive as we move ahead. We take action on most things in terms of our infrastructure, make sure we drive out as much cost as we can, flatten the organization, and make sure we have a more agile execution model as we move ahead. You prepare for whatever is coming at you, right? As I always have said, when you take those actions, do it when you can, not when you must.
Right.
We're doing it now because we can and prepare ourselves for a much, much better, more competitive, more agile 3M as we move ahead. Will pricing be one part of those and be driven by the market? Well, let's see. The important thing that you have all your fundamentals in place so you can compete.
Great. Nick, just very quickly, just in the second half, the comps get just a little bit tougher, yet you kind of heighten to the high end of the range, even though the first half growth is more at the midpoint of the new range. Should we just ignore the comps and assume that things accelerate in the second half of the year despite that? Do you see the true economy getting better in the second half? Just would seem that your peak growth rate probably happened in the first quarter. Maybe I'm wrong about that from a timing perspective.
Yeah.
Okay, sales or something.
Yeah. When it comes to the comps, there's a couple different things going on. One, for instance, our electronics and industrial, both of those, I agree with you, we're going to have slightly tougher comps in the second half of the year. In the case of consumer and in healthcare, both of those will be seeing easier comps. I wouldn't call it a big statement on our fact that we're seeing an improving economy. We're seeing a fairly stable economy outlook for the balance of the year. Our move in the organic growth range to now be 3%-5%, I'd take as confidence in our ability to maintain the growth trajectory, even with the tougher comp that we'll be facing primarily in the fourth quarter.
Got it. Okay, thanks a lot, guys. Thanks for the detail.
Thank you.
Our next question comes from the line of Deane Dray of RBC Capital Markets. Please proceed with your question.
Thank you. Good morning, everyone.
Morning, Deane.
Hey, just start off in consumer with the U.S. being down 1%. This is seasonally where we see a back-to-school impact in consumer. How did that play out the quarter? We've seen industry reports where spending has been higher year-over-year and want to see how that rippled through for you guys.
Yeah. We are not through that, but I think the headline there is that it's as strong as we've seen in the past and maybe slightly stronger. I think what you see is if you compare maybe the last couple of years versus five, six years ago, is that they wait longer to make the purchase today versus they did three, four, five years ago. We will see more growth coming for that category specifically. If you look upon our performance for consumer in the U.S., we can basically go right down to the office supply by definition. There's nothing else going on there. When you talk about back to school, it looks very solid for us.
Good to hear. Then a follow-up question, Inge. There was some interesting announcements regarding succession planning at 3M this quarter. Looks orderly, looks well signaled, especially compared to the past. Can you comment on these announcements, maybe specifically on expectations regarding timing?
First of all, the announcement was not about succession planning. The announcement was around we have a job to do. If you saw the two announcement we did, we announced Mike Roman to take on the growth piece of the enterprise, right? Leading the five business group and the international piece. That's around growth, and we need more growth, that will be his focus. Then HC Shin was appointed Vice Chair, and he's taking on all the efficiencies. Everything going in relative to manufacturing and supply chain, and also R&D and strategic planning was put under his place. As I've said earlier now, succession planning start the first day in office, right? As a CEO, you have to look upon it from the first day you walk into office. That's your obligation.
I have done that, and we have many very strong leaders in the company. Mike and HC are two of them, and they both have had a tremendous successful record relative to leading businesses. HC Shin, the last six years, led international, replaced me in that role before I became CEO. Before that, he in fact, led the industrial business group. Mike Roman had led the industrial business group the last three years. Before that, was the strategic planner for the company, have lived both in Europe and Asia and have had good results. We have two very solid individuals that have a job to do here, and that's the whole point I would like to make with any comments around it.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Our next question comes from the line of Julian Mitchell of Credit Suisse. Please proceed with your question.
Hi, good morning.
Morning, Julian.
Morning. Just a question on the EPS bridge. In Q2, you had about $0.08 of tailwind from organic growth and productivity. In the first quarter, that was about $0.22. The price-volume dynamics, despite the questions so far, aren't grotesquely different in Q2 from Q1. I wondered if there was something else going on that had weighed on the operating leverage in Q2, maybe the timing of the business transformation or something like that, and how you thought about that $0.08 tailwind in Q2 in the context of what we should see in Q3 and Q4.
Julian, if I think about the different quarters, as you're talking about Q1, Q2, we did see core underlying margin expansion once we strip out the gains in these strategic investments in Q1. In Q2, we were more or less flat. That's mathematically much of what's describing what you're seeing there on that EPS differential between Q1 and Q2. As we dissect that a little deeper, Julian, where did we not see some of the margin expansion we had seen in the past, and what does that mean for the second half of the year? Our industrial business is one of those businesses where we didn't see as much leverage as we have seen in the past.
As we look to the second half of the year, we're expecting for the total year that we're going to be seeing 50 basis points at a minimum, possibly higher of year-on-year margin expansion. Stripping out the gain and strategic investment impact. If we get to the underlying 50 basis points or slightly higher, some of the reasons that will drive added leverage in a business such as industrial, we do see that improved pricing that I've talked about earlier. We do see improved results from our productivity programs and probably some added belt-tightening going on.
Understood. Thank you. Just my second and last question would be around the growth outlook in the EMEA region. I think a lot of companies, this earnings have talked about a disconnect of sort of the good soft data, not necessarily translating into hard orders or sales. Should we think about your first half overall organic growth in the region of 1% that is a good placeholder of sort of what you expect for the second half? Maybe just any update on how you're seeing business in Europe in recent months.
I think when we look upon the rest of the year, I think you can see slightly more growth than you have seen in the first half of the year. We look maybe for 2% in the second part of the year. I would say comment relative to West Europe specifically, is more around, I think Germany is still doing well, and if you look upon our figures and the way we do business over there, if you take manufacturing PMI in Germany, the second quarter was 59%. You should compare that to like 50 and 51, 52 for China. Germany, by definition, which is the big engine in Europe, are doing well on the manufacturing side. Our business in Europe, if you look upon the portfolio, our industrial business is very strong. From that perspective, it's okay as you look ahead.
We have not seen much of an impact for us relative to Brexit. I think countries like Spain are improving, but very much based on a lower base and some trouble they've had in the past. When I look upon it, I would say Germany's doing well, which is a key element for you to be successful in Europe. Nordic is doing fine, and you start to see some uptick maybe from countries like Spain. France goes sideways as we speak, but with a new outcome of the election, I think that will be more positive if they can execute what they have promised. Why not? I think as an outcome for Europe, generally speaking, is more positive than negative in my view.
Relative to 3M, we have been on this optimization of the organization for quite some time, and if you joined, or for those of you that joined in Neuss, Germany here a little more than a month ago, our whole execution of the EPS and SAP system is going very well. Last week, I visited both center of expertise that we have. We have one service center in Poland, and we have one supply chain center in Switzerland. I visited both of them, and things are going very well for us in that execution. For me, Europe, generally speaking, externally look more positive than negative in my view. I'm not talking only here the next two quarter. I'm talking a little bit further out. Our structure in place in Europe start to really gain momentum and deliver for us.
This quarter was a little bit tough on top line, generally speaking, I'm pleased with the progress we have made, and that will pay off as we move ahead.
Great. Thank you.
Thank you.
Our next question comes from the line of Joe Ritchie of Goldman Sachs. Please proceed with your question.
Thanks, and good morning, everyone.
Good morning, Joe.
Joe.
Nick, I want to kind of circle back to some of the comments you made earlier on the strategic investments and just doing some of the back of the envelope math here. It seems like you're going to put forth about $400 million towards strategic investments this year, call it roughly $100 million next year, and then we'll see in 2019. Then the payback in 2020 on an annualized basis is $125 million-$175 million. I'm just wondering, what is it about the investments that you're making that it just seems like it's taking a while for the payback to actually be seen in your margins? Maybe if you can just provide some color in that would be helpful.
Yeah, Joe, thanks for asking that question. There's different types of actions a company like 3M can take. Sometimes an action where we enter into a restructuring, where we're reducing the size of our workforce, that can be a much faster payback. You've seen actions like that we've done and see a very fast payback. When it comes to optimizing our manufacturing and supply chain footprint, those paybacks take time to materialize. We don't start seeing benefits, Joe, until we actually have the manufacturing site closed that we've chosen to action and have the new manufacturing going on in a new location. That takes time to happen. It takes time to work with work councils, with employee organizations. It takes time to In some cases, re-qualify that product if we're moving.
It can many times be several quarters from the point we announce it until we've actually physically made the change and start realizing those benefits. This is different, and this is why this one takes longer to happen. Still a very important part of our strategy, though, to be by 2020 getting to those savings that we're projecting.
Nick, that's helpful color. I guess maybe, just a clarifying question on that. This year you have gains that are essentially offsetting all of the investments that you're making. Next year, there's going to be additional investments that you're making. Is the right way to think about 2018 that there's going to be a net negative to your margins from these investments, or are there going to be other offsetting items as well in 2018?
Well, I can't speculate on whether there'll be more M&A activity that will happen, because those we announce once we have clear line of sight that they'll actually happen. In terms of the footprint side, we'll still be seeing the negative impact, in absolute terms, in 2018 on our margin and on our EPS. We expect in 2019 to become positive, and then by 2020 to be the full amount. As far as the M&A and what that might do in 2018, I think it's too early for me to speculate on that piece.
Okay. Fair enough. Maybe just talking about the growth investments that you're making, and just to make sure that I understand that well. You mentioned about $100 million in growth investments this year. If I just think about just the payback from those investments, you mentioned it was about a point to growth to call it, like $300 million or so in revenue at your operating margin, 25%, say. You're talking about, call it roughly $75 million in profit. The question, I guess, is regarding these growth investments, do you think that going forward this is going to be part of the status quo, or you're going to have to continue to make these investments? Are these investments going to drive a longer cycle product growth across your portfolio?
Well, first of all, it's $104 million additional investment for commercialization this year, and we said it will drive 50 to 100 basis points of growth. Six, seven months into the year, we see that coming exactly as we laid out. I think it's important to think about it. This is products and categories where we already have a very good position in the marketplace. This is more sell more of the same, but penetrate different parts of the world. This is not relative to total new products or anything. This is category of products into markets where we already have a very good return and a good position in some parts of the world, but not everywhere. We selected those programs in August of last year in order to make those investments.
With success, I think they will get more investment as they go, but it will be part of the normal business model. This was an acceleration for us and an additional push on, I would say pretty safe product lines for us to penetrate more and broader and deeper around the world.
Thanks, Inge.
Thank you.
Our next question comes from the line of Laurence Alexander of Jefferies. Please proceed with your question.
Good morning. Just a quick one. You flagged certain markets where in organic local currency terms, you've been in decline of filtration, roofing granules, office supplies, European healthcare, European energy, European consumer. If you look at that cluster of businesses, I think I might have missed one or two. If you look at that cluster of businesses, do you see a line of sight to getting that cluster back to a growth track next year, or do you need a change in the macro environment to get there?
Well, I think generally speaking, you will have from time to time some businesses that are not growing as fast as the rest of them. I think the important thing for us is to make sure that all businesses can capitalize and use our four fundamental strengths in order to be strong. The four fundamental strengths we have talked about is our technology platforms, our manufacturing capabilities, our geographic reach, and our brand equity. If you follow those categories, you will grow over time, and you will perform very well. As none of the businesses you listed there that I will say will fall out of that frame specifically. I'm not overly concerned relative to any of them that you talked about specifically. I would say all of us leading businesses, we would like all businesses to grow every quarter the whole time, right?
That is not reality. I would say our competitive position based on the four fundamentals of the company is very strong, and we should be able to outperform the local market wherever we compete. As you know, we have talked about 1.5 times IPI, Industrial Production Index, as a target that we have done in the past, and I think we should do closer to 1.7. I'm optimistic relative to the future.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Our next question comes from the line of Andrew Obin of Bank of America Merrill Lynch. Please proceed with your question.
Good morning.
Good morning, Andrew.
Just to summarize, it's been a bit of a frustrating call. Just to summarize, your predecessor focused on driving top line and there was this view that top line comes at the expense of margin, that if you get growth, you're not going to get a margin. This quarter, I think, seemed to bring back those fears. On top of it, of course, you have the Amazon fear. If you look forward, do you think your new strategy for expanding some key products means that margin is now capped for a while as we're pursuing this growth strategy? Or do you think 3M still has levers to drive margin up both near term and long term?
Andrew, no fear. Don't be overly concerned relative to that strategy. I think you have to think about it in the way that a certain element at certain time you need to do with the business. I think what we have done, we have worked very hard on the portfolio in order to make sure that we stay in businesses where we can use our four fundamental strengths. If there's some businesses that have been underperforming, in every single case, the reason have been that they have not been able to use the four fundamental strengths. I think that's the basis for it. We have also said that by shifting and moving in the portfolio, our performance will be much better over time, and I think we have proven that in electronic and energy. I think we have proven that in Safety and Graphics.
I think we have proven that in consumer, if I go back to the 2012 starting point. In healthcare, we didn't need to do much because that portfolio are very strong by definition with high margins. Now we are focusing more in on industrial, and we are taking action there. That's one third of the company, we need to get industrial up and growing at a faster rate, and we have now had three good quarters of growth as we speak. We are now taking action and more focus as we move forward relative to productivity, organization structure, et cetera. For me, it's not a question of one quarter, it's a question of how will it look as we go forward.
I'm totally confident with all the work we have done, the way we have worked on the portfolio, the way we are improving, the way we go to market, that we will continue to lever very well and deliver good result as we move forward. If not, I wouldn't execute the plan at all.
Thank you. That's a great answer. Just a question in terms of what would it take to get high end of your guidance on top line in terms of key regions and businesses, if you could outline the bull case scenario?
We upgraded range from 3-5 as you saw, right? I think to be in the middle of that is very doable. We have 4% growth in the first part of the year. I will not talk about businesses, but I would say from a geographical perspective, if we can capitalize more on our strengths in United States, even more on that will help us. I think the same for West Europe. I think it's United States, we are doing fine, but I think we are so strong here that we should be able to take even more of the opportunities in United States. As I said earlier, West Europe looks slightly better in my mind than I thought maybe two, three quarters ago. Let's see if that can come through during the rest of the year.
If that's happened, maybe can push us up to the higher end. Let's see. Let's hold the range for 3-5 for now, and then we can talk next quarter to see how it look like if we can give you some more color to it. 3-5 is very realistic for us. As I said earlier, I'm very pleased with where we are after two quarters in terms of result. 4% growth after two quarter is respectable for us, I think, and pretty good.
Just to reiterate, because I'm getting these emails. You outlined a margin growth strategy in Europe. You're sort of positive on margin opportunity in Safety and Graphics. None of that has changed.
No, nothing of that has changed. No.
No, nothing's changed on that front.
Not at all.
Absolutely not.
Not at all.
Thank you.
That concludes the question and answer portion of our conference call. I'll now turn the call back over to Inge Thulin for some closing comments.
Thank you. As I said earlier, I'm pleased with the performance through the first 6 months of the year. We are successfully executing the 3M playbook and positioned to deliver a strong 2017. As you saw today in our updated guidance, this includes good progress relative to our four primary financial objectives, EPS, organic local currency sales growth, ROI, and free cash flow conversion. At the same time, we are making investments to accelerate growth and strengthen our portfolio, which will build on an even more competitive 3M for 2018 and beyond. Thank you very much for joining us, and have a good day.
Ladies and gentlemen, that concludes the conference call for today. We thank you for your participation and ask that you please disconnect your lines.